MA 


iiil 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


GIFT 


■J.LOUJ    /■    /^i^^^-L 


'    c//    ^1//<^^^J"^ 


Kcb)  Ccstamrnt  UMiitiboohs 

EDITED    BY 
SHAILER    MATHEWS 


THE 

HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM 

OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 


NEW  TESTAMENT  HANDBOOKS 

EDITED   BY   SHAILER   MATHEWS 

THE    UNIVERSITY   OF   CHICAGO 


A  series  of  volumes  presenting  briefly  and  intelligibly  the 
results  of  the  scientific  study  of  the  New  Testament.  Each  vol- 
ume covers  its  own  field,  and  is  intended  for  the  general  reader  as 
well  as  the  special  student. 

i2mo    Cloth    75  cents  each 

THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  TEXTUAL  CRITICISM  OF  THE  NEW 
TESTAMENT.  Professor  Marvin  R.  Vincent,  Union  Theo- 
logical Seminary. 

THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  OF  THE  NEW 
TESTAMENT.  Professor  Henry  S.  Nash,  Cambridge  Divinity 
School. 

INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

Professor  B.  WisxK'i  Bacun,  Yale  Divinity  School. 

THE  HISTORY  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT  TIMES  IN  PALESTINE. 

Professor  Shailer  Mathews,  The  University  of  Chicago. 

THE  TEACHING  OF  JESUS.  Professor  George  B.  Stevens, 
Yale  Divinity  School. 

THE  BIBLICAL  THEOLOGY  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 
Professor  E.  P.  Gould. 


THE  HISTORY 


ov 


THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM  OF 
THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 


BEING  THE   HISTORY  OF  THE   PROCESS  WHEREBY 

THE  WORD  OF  GOD  HAS  WON  THE  RIGHT 

TO  BE   UNDERSTOOD 


BT 


HENRY   S.   NASH 

PROFESSOR  OF  NEW   TESTAMENT   INTERPRETATION   IN  THB 
EPISCOPAL  THEOLOGICAL  SCHOOL  AT   CAMBRIDGE 


NEW  EDITION,   WITH  A  NEW  PREFACE 


Neto  gorft 
THE   MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

LONDON :   MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  Ltd. 

1906 

All  rights  reserved 


Copyright,  1900,  1906, 
By  the  MACMILLAN  C(^MPANT. 


Set  up  and  electrotyped.     Published  September,  igoo. 
Reprinted  July,  1901.     New  edition  March,  1906. 


Norbjoob  IPrraa 

J.  S.  Cushinp  .t  Co.  —  pK-iwick  &  Smith  Co. 

Norwood,  Mass.,  U.S.A. 


0'S 

A//7-rl 


/ 


PREFACE 

This  book  may  seem  to  be  badly  planned.  Where 
space  is  so  scanty,  to  spend  four  chapters  in  working 
up  to  the  critical  period  that  began  in  the  eighteenth 
century  looks  out  of  proportion.  Yet  the  purpose  of 
the  book  justifies  and  even  compels  this  procedure. 
The  aim  is  to  make  clear  to  non-professional  readers 
the  nature  of  the  Higher  Criticism  and  its  divine 
right  within  the  churches.  To  do  this  the  history  of 
Bible-study  must  be  followed  far  into  the  history 
of  Christianity,  even  as  far  as  the  time  when,  by  the 
cooperation  of  the  Catholic  Church  with  the  moral 
forces  of  pagan  antiquity,  the  foundations  of  modern 
life  and  culture  were  laid,  and  the  Bible  was  taken 
to  the  heart  of  Europe.  Criticism  can  defend  itself 
before  the  people  only  by  showing  that  the  history 
of  our  religion  has  made  it  inevitable.  And  to  do 
this  with  any  measure  of  success,  the  historical  causes 
and  conditions  of  criticism  must  be  treated  at  greater 
length  than  would  be  seemly  if  the  book  were  designed 
for  professional  readers. 

The  reader  will  remember  that  the  aim  of  the  book 
is  not  to  give  a  detailed  account  of  the  movements  of 
opinion  in  the  field  of  Introduction.  That  matter 
is  handled  by  another  book  in  this  series.  The  aim 
is  rather  a  philosophy  of  the  history  of  Criticism. 


yoftjfOsjy 


PREFACE   TO   NEW   EDITION 


To  borrow  a  sentence  from  Hooker,  "  Dangerous  it 
were  for  the  feeble  brain  of  man  to  wade  far  into  the 
doings  of  the  Most  High."  And  it  looks  like  that  to 
venture  on  an  estimate  of  the  fundamental  forces  of 
our  age,  to  guess  at  the  direction  in  which  the  tides 
of  time  are  setting,  and  then  to  bring  one's  guess  to 
bear  on  the  nature  of  the  Church's  duty  in  the  period 
that  is  opening  before  us.  Yet  it  is  possible,  by  put- 
ting together  certain  main  facts  and  tendencies,  to  fore- 
cast to  some  extent  the  drift  and  movement  of  history. 
And  if  so,  it  is  not  presumptuous  to  draw  an  inference 
regarding  the  task  and  responsibility  of  the  Church. 
Our  Lord  has  given  her  the  powers  of  binding  and 
loosing.  Her  privilege  it  is  to  look  into  the  mind  of 
God  and  thus  to  become  an  interpreter  of  life  for 
man.  She  is  the  \Yise  Householder  in  the  Master's 
Parable,  bringing  forth  out  of  her  treasure  things 
old  and  things  new.  At  every  crisis  in  the  history  of 
mankind  she  is  to  uncover  the  foundations  of  the  moral 
law  and  to  heal  the  wounded  conscience  with  saving 
certainty  touching  the  ultimate  end  and  the  final 
issues  of  our  experience.  So,  to  rule  the  time,  she 
must  make  herself  the  servant  of  the  time.  And  if 
tlie  logic  of  history,  which  for  the  Church  is  the  will 
of  God,  is  outlining  certain  facts  with  clearness  suffi- 
cient to  enable  us  to  perceive  their  main  lines,  then 
the  Church  will  open  her  treasure  of  truth,  bringing 
forth  things  new  as  well  as  things  old  to  gladden  and 
strengthen  the  heart  of  man. 

vii 


Vlll  PREFACE 

One  fact,  already  outlined  with  a  fair  degree  of 
clearness,  is  Nationality.  We  have  barely  begun  to 
enter  into  its  deeper  meanings.  In  its  final  form  it 
becomes  a  democratic  nationality,  of  the  type  which 
America  illustrates  on  so  great  a  scale.  What  shall 
Christianity  do  for  the  democratic  nation  ?  How  keep 
its  fearful  force  from  being  brutalized  ?  How  make 
its  unity  the  servant  and  not  the  tyrant  of  the  weak,  the 
critic  and  not  the  competitor  of  imperial  ambition  ? 
And  how  ground  its  unity  ?  It  is  easy  for  the  State's 
men  to  be  optimistic  so  long  as  Democracy  has  not 
been  searchingly  tested.  But  when  the  tests  become 
searching,  how  is  the  State  to  be  saved  from  bitter  dis- 
illusionment ?  How  is  the  social  will,  which  is  the 
source  of  real  law,  to  be  made  strong  and  creative  ? 
Only  by  the  self-revelation  of  the  Divine  Unity.  Here 
the  Nation's  unity  finds  its  ground  and  root.  Chris- 
tianity alone,  revealing  the  unity  of  the  Living  God  in 
the  depth  and  passion  of  human  fellowship,  can  hallow 
the  Nation.  And  here  the  Church  is  to  see  more  and 
more  plainly  her  work  and  her  duty.  It  is  at  this 
point  that  Domestic  Missions,  taken  in  the  largest 
sense,  find  their  final  reason  and  their  decisive  test. 

And  abroad  ?  The  Church  is  just  entering  on  the 
greatest  debate  of  her  history.  She  conquered  the 
Mediterranean  World  by  showing  herself  superior  to 
the  other  Oriental  Religions  that  were  her  competitors. 
But  there  was  one  Oriental  Religion  with  which 
Christianity  did  not  come  into  close  contact,  and  that 
was  the  higher  form  of  the  faith  that  has  had  its  birth 
and  breeding  in  India.  Here  the  second  great  fact  of 
contemporary  history  is  disclosing  itself.  Christianity 
cannot  overcome  that  Oriental  faith  by  emphasizing 
the  monastic  view  of  life.  The  sweet  and  urgent 
mysticism  of  India  is  incomparable  of  its  kind.  But 
the  kind  is  below  the  level  and  genius  of  our  faith. 


PREFACE  IX 

It  is  through  the  Christian  view  of  the  divine  Unity 
and  Personality  revealed  as  the  root  and  ground  of 
the  personal  and  social  will  making  for  righteousness, 
that  our  religion  is  to  triumph  in  the  great  debate. 
For  the  ultimate  problem  of  the  Kace  and  the  Nation 
is  the  problem  of  Law.  But  in  the  case  of  a  demo- 
cratic Nation  the  problem  of  law  is  immensely  difficult. 
It  demands  the  highest  and  most  tenacious  form  of 
personal  and  social  purpose.  Such  a  purpose  can  only 
be  created  and  maintained  by  a  religion  that  sets  a 
clear  moral  end  and  goal  for  history  and  pledges  the 
mind  and  being  of  God  to  its  attainment.  Foreign 
Missions,  when  deeply  studied,  bring  us  by  another 
road  to  the  goal  of  Home  Missions.  Christianity 
must  manifest  its  power  to  build  up  and  support  a 
holy  and  ministering  Nation.     This  is  the  final  test. 

The  third  fact  which  is  standing  out  with  increasing 
clearness  is  the  disintegration  of  the  doctrine  of  infal- 
libility. The  infallibility  of  the  Scriptures  cannot, 
in  the  long  run,  be  separated  from  the  infallibility  of 
the  Church.  Our  Roman  Catholic  brethren  are  at 
this  point  irrefutable  in  their  logic.  If  we  accept  the 
premiss  of  Biblical  Infallibility,  we  must  eventually 
have  an  administrative  infallibility  to  make  it  some- 
thing better  than  a  phrase.  The  doctrine  of  infalli- 
bility is  an  organism  of  ideas.  It  is  not  possible  to 
permanently  detach  one  part  of  it  from  the  rest.  But 
concede  the  Roman  Catholic  position,  and  we  discover 
that  we  have  paid  an  immense  price.  In  order  to 
make  administrative  infallibility  effective,  we  must 
have  a  thoroughly  clericalized  Church.  The  Laity  may 
not  have  any  primary  part  in  its  government.  And 
then,  when  the  Laity  have  been  driven  from  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  Church,  it  turns  out  that  the  clerical- 
ized Church  must  be  a  monasticized  Church.  The 
picked  men  and  women  of  our  religion,  to  the  end 


X  PREFACE 

that  they  may  realize  the  moral  ideal,  are  forbidden 
to  marry.  And  this  means,  if  we  think  straight,  that 
Christianity  gives  up  the  hope  of  moralizing  the 
common  life.  The  Family  is  not  holy,  in  the  primary 
meaning  of  our  terms,  and  the  Nation  inseparably 
joined  to  the  family,  is  not  holy  in  the  highest  and 
deepest  sense. 

So,  if  we  are  to  think  clearly  and  to  a  point,  it  be- 
comes plain  that  we  purchase  our  doctrine  of  infalli- 
bility at  a  very  high  price.  We  pay  for  it  with 
moral  scepticism.  Can  we  agree  to  quiet  our  under- 
standing at  so  heavy  a  cost  ?  Our  hearts  are  set  on 
solving  the  problem  of  Democracy.  How  to  make 
the  Nation  holy,  deserving  the  utmost  sacrifice  of  her 
children  in  times  of  inevitable  war  and,  —  a  vastly 
harder  and  nobler  task,  —  deserving  and  receiving 
their  unstinted  devotion  in  times  of  peace  ?  That  is 
our  imperious,  our  inevitable  question.  How  answer 
it  ?  Solve  the  problem  we  cannot,  unless  Christianity 
serve  us.  But  a  Christianity  that  has  been  monasti- 
cized  ?  Will  that  serve  us  ?  Or  must  we  have  the 
Christianity  of  Christ  ?  What  we  must  have  in  full 
measure,  if  we  are  to  serve  the  Nation,  is  a  religion 
that  gives  us  a  solid  faith,  an  unswerving  and  untiring 
confidence  regarding  the  moral  quality  and  the  moral 
end  of  history.  This  the  Word  of  God  does.  But,  to 
receive  the  full  message  of  that  Word,  we  must  give  up 
our  doctrine  of  infallibility.  Then,  for  the  first  time, 
will  our  Bible  have  gained  its  full  power  of  appeal. 
Its  message  will  become  a  living  word  from  the  living 
God,  winged  with  power  through  the  life  of  the  In- 
carnate One,  and  bringing  peace  to  the  hearts  of  the 
folk  who  have  dedicated  themselves  to  the  wars  of 
God  in  behalf  of  a  holy  Family  and  a  holy  Nation. 

Therefore  the  Church  of  Christ  is  in  honor  bound  to 
subject  our  inherited  idea  about  the  Bible  to  a  rever- 


PREFACE  XI 

ent  and  unsparing  examination.  The  work,  if  it  be 
done  grudgingly  or  of  necessity,  -will  not  be  rightly 
done.  The  Church  cannot  afford  to  wait  until  out- 
siders force  it  u})on  her  at  the  cannon's  mouth.  She 
must  herself  take  the  initiative.  She  alone  can  do 
the  work  with  the  patience  and  the  reverent  fearless- 
ness becoming  to  a  study  upon  which  such  incalcu- 
lable consequences  hang.  She  must  study  her  Scrip- 
tures in  the  historical  spirit.  She  must  discover  and 
bring  to  light  their  human  authors.  The  Old  Testa- 
ment will  then  unfold  itself  as  a  trustworthy  book  of 
witness  to  the  Hope  of  a  Nation  chosen  to  discover 
and  publish  God's  deepest  method  in  self-revelation. 
The  Life  of  our  Lord  will  be  interpreted  as  the  mind 
and  work  of  the  Head  and  Leader  of  the  Chosen 
Nation  who,  taking  the  Nation's  Hope  for  His  theme 
and  His  task,  purified  and  perfected  it  through  His 
Cross,  authenticated  and  verified  it  through  His  resur- 
rection. The  Old  Testament  and  the  New  Testament 
together  will  be  studied  and  read  as  the  book  attesting 
the  holiness  of  the  Nation,  and  bearing  witness  to  the 
Nations  that,  to  preserve  themselves,  they  must  become 
ministering  Nations  and,  taking  the  Christ  for  their 
leader  and  guide,  pray  and  plan  for  the  Kingdom  of 
God. 

When  we  have  gladly  given  up  the  idea  of  inLJli- 
bility  in  the  interest  of  the  Scriptures  themselves, 
then  we  shall  expect  to  find  errors  and  illusions  in 
the  Bible.  The  mental  habits  of  Antiquity  make 
errors  in  matters  of  science  inevitable.  The  impas- 
sioned patriotism  of  the  Prophets  makes  illusions  in 
the  field  of  historical  perspective  equally  inevitable. 
The  conceptions  of  corporate  authorship,  widely  dif- 
ferent from  our  literary  methods,  which  prevailed 
everywhere  in  Antiquity  render  certain  incoherencies 
and  contradictions  a  matter  of  course.     If  we  judge 


xii  PREFACE 

the  Scriptures  in  their  own  light,  these  things  will  not 
surprise  or  disturb  us.  On  the  contrary,  we  shall 
joyously  accept  them  as  parts  of  the  great  plan  which 
has  given  us  our  Bible.  Without  them,  the  Bible 
could  not  have  become  what  it  is,  the  one  and  sole 
competent  Book  of  Witness  to  the  quality  of  God's 
being  and  will,  the  method  of  His  self-revelation  and 
the  means  whereby  earnest  people  bent  upon  a  sublime 
task  may  be  saved  from  sin  and  melancholy  and 
despair. 

St.  Ignatius  says  to  Polycarp,  "  The  times  call  for 
thee  as  pilots  call  for  the  winds."  Is  not  the  Divine 
Pilot  demanding  that  the  Church  shall  manifest  her 
critical  and  creative  powers  ?  The  Nation  must  be 
saved  from  the  aristocrat  on  the  one  side  and  from  the 
monk  on  the  other.  It  is  through  her  ability  to  guide 
the  Nations  toward  the  Kingdom  of  God  that  the 
Church  is  to  come  off  triumphant  in  the  debate  between 
the  World's  religions.  Is  not  free  and  fearless  Bible 
Study  a  necessary  part  of  her  equipment  ?  Sir  Philip 
Sidney  said  that  the  Ballad  of  Chevy  Chase  stirred 
him  like  a  trumpet.  When  we  consider  the  signs  of 
the  times,  does  not  the  obligation  of  reverent  criticism 
become  the  trumpet  of  God,  stirring  our  blood  ? 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  I 

PAGE 

Criticism  avd  Interpretation 1 

View  taken  of  the  subject — Criticism  is  the  modern 
form  of  Bible-study  —  Its  motive  is  identical  with  the 
motive  of  Bible-study  in  earlier  periods  —  The  means 
and  methods  differ  —  The  motive  of  Bible-study  has 
always  been  the  desire  to  know  the  Word  of  God 
deeply  —  In  former  times  the  Scriptures  were  not  free 
to  speak  their  mind  in  their  own  tongue  —  The  text 
was  dominated  and  manipulated  by  dogma  that  came 
upon  it  from  without  —  In  our  times  the  text  is  being 
interpreted  along  the  lines  of  its  own  meaning.  This, 
in  sum,  is  criticism  —  The  explanation  and  defence 
of  criticism  is  to  be  found  in  the  history  of  Bible- 
study  as  a  whole. 

CHAPTER  II 

The  Bible's  Definition  of  Revelation  and  the  Ideal 

OF  Bible-study  that  goes  with  it  .         .        .         .17 

The  main  qualities  of  the  book  upon  which  Chris- 
tian interpretation  has  exercised  itself  —  The  nature 
of  the  self-revelation  of  God  —  The  Bible  defines  itself 
as  a  Word  of  God  delivered  through  a  genuinely 
human  experience  —  The  Bible  describes  itself  as 
being  mainly  a  book  of  histories  —  The  heart  of  the 
New  Testament  is  the  story  of  a  sinless,  yet  absolutely 
human,  life,  wherein  God's  deepest  Word  about  Him- 
self took  flesh  —  The  Holy  Scriptures  command  us  to 

xiii 


XIV  CONTENTS 

PAGK 

test  all  views  of  the  Bible  by  bringing  them  close  to 
the  definition  given  by  Scripture  itself — The  nature 
of  the  Bible  forces  us  to  take  it  into  the  light  of  his- 
tory in  order  to  understand  it. 


CHAPTER   III 

Hovr  Criticism  became  Necessary         .        .        .        .27 

The  irrepressible  conflict  between  the  ecclesiastical 
Interpretation  of  the  Middle  Ages  and  the  sacred 
text.  The  fundamental  idea  of  genuine  Christianity 
is  that  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  being  the  record  of  God's 
self-revelation  and  the  book  of  witness  to  the  promise 
and  presence  of  the  perfect  life  amongst  men,  are  the 
standard  by  which  the  Church  is  to  judge  her  life  — 
The  ecclesiastical  doctrine  of  Tradition  led  the  Church 
to  a  position  where  she  was  more  or  less  disloyal  to 
this  fundamental  idea  —  The  Tradition  put  itself  for- 
ward as  an  infallible,  that  is  to  say,  a  sufficient  inter- 
pretation of  God's  Word  —  Finally  it  vested  its  claims 
and  rights  in  the  person  of  an  infallible  Pope  —  The 
contradiction  between  the  sacred  text  and  the  estab- 
lished interpretation  was  concealed  by  an  allegorical 
or  unhistorical  interpretation  —  The  Bible  itself,  to 
secure  its  rights,  demanded  a  breach  with  Tradition 
—  Criticism  mevitable. 


CHAPTER  IV 

How  THE  Possibility  of  Criticism  was  given      .        .      53 

The  Reformation  —  Renaissance  movement ;  —  The 
laity  secure  the  right  to  think  and  speak  on  sacred 
things  —  The  sacerdotal  monopoly  of  interpretation 
comes  to  an  end  —  The  Reformation  asserts  the  right 
of  the  lay  conscience  to  know  the  Scriptures,  the 
standard  of  the  ideal  life,  at  first  hand  —  The  Renais- 


CONTENTS  XV 


PAOE 


sance  asserts  the  right  of  reason  to  look  into  divine 
trutli  —  The  Bible  comes  into  direct  contact  with 
common  religious  consciousness,  and  is  set  up  as  its 
supreme  authority  —  The  fundamental  idea  of  Chris- 
tianity clearly  recognised  —  The  Bible  shakes  off  the 
bonds  put  upon  it  by  human  opinion  —  An  historical 
interpretation  of  Scripture  necessary  —  Bible-study 
ceases  to  be  indirect,  through  the  Fathers  and  through 
Ti-adition,  and  becomes  a  study  at  first  hand. 


CHAPTER  V 

How  Criticism  was  realised 77 

The  eighteenth  century  —  The  critical  period  in  the 
thought  of  Europe  —  Dogma  breaks  down  —  Tradition 
cashiered  —  The  sacred  text  set  free  —  By  means  of 
a  grammatical  and  historical  method  of  interpretation 
the  Bible  insures  itself  against  allegorical  abuse  — 
The  Bible  its  own  guardian  —  The  human  authors  of 
Holy  Scripture  come  plainly  into  view  —  The  ideal  of 
criticism  appears  —  All  the  records  of  the  past  open 
themselves  to  a  searching  examination. 


CHAPTER  VI 

The  Preliminary  Work  of  Criticism  ....     100 

From  Semler  to  Strauss,  1750-1835;  —  The  criti- 
cism of  the  text  followed  by  "Higher"  or  interior 
study  —  The  decay  of  the  ancient  conception  of  inspi- 
ration makes  a  litorarj-  study  of  the  New  Testament 
possible  —  Problems  appear  —  The  relations  of  New 
Testament  books  to  one  another  are  discovered  — 
The  historical  movements  back  of  the  books  are 
suggested. 


xvi  CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  VII 

The  Turning-point  in  the  Course  of  Criticism,  1835  111 
The  criticism  of  1750-1835  lacked  a  controlling  and 
coordinating  conception  —  The  dogmatic  concept  of 
the  Canon  had  given  unity  to  patristic  and  mediaeval 
and  early  Protestant  Bible-study  —  That  conception 
shattered  in  the  eighteenth  century  —  No  new  unify- 
ing principle  to  take  its  place  —  Studies  of  Scripture, 
while  critical  and  free,  were  disconnected  —  The  re- 
sults lacked  an  organising  principle  —  In  1835  a  new 
ruling  idea  comes  on  the  field  —  The  idea  of  humanity 
—  Sacred  history  the  record  of  a  human  process  — 
The  literary  study  of  the  New  Testament  becomes 
coherent. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

Tendencies 134 

Criticism  as  an  academic  process  —  Forces  deeper 
•  than  academic  thought  —  The  men  of  the  chair  freer 
in  Germany  than  in  any  other  country  —  Even  in 
Germany,  influences  coming  from  outside  the  uni- 
versities have  been  masterful  —  A  purely  critical 
process  is  an  illusion  —  Fundamental  tendencies  in 
German  criticism  —  The  individual  scholars  did  not 
create  them  and  can  only  in  part  modify  them. 


CHAPTER  IX 

The  Schools 153 

The  "Schools"  of  critical  opinion  more  or  less 
loosely  connected  groups  of  scholars  —  Tubingen 
School  —  Conservative  School  —  Mediating  School  — 
Ritschlian  School. 


CONTENTS  XVll 


CHAPTER   X 


PAGE 

The  Historical  Spirit 171 

The  historical  spirit  "a  new  kind  of  piety" — The 
aim  is  to  give  the  right  of  free  speech  to  the  men  of 
the  past  —  The  records  of  the  past  to  be  read  in  their 
own  language  and  along  the  lines  of  their  own  feeling 

—  The  aim  of  the  Reformation  was  to  set  the  Word 
of  God  free  from  subjection  to  ecclesiastical  tradition 

—  By  the  help  of  modern  methods  in  historical  study 
and  through  the  use  of  the  materials  of  knowledge 
now  brought  within  our  reach,  the  principle  of  the 
Reformation  can  be  realised  —  The  spirit  of  scieutiiic 
study  the  ally  of  Holy  Scripture. 


CHAPTER   XI 

The  Inspiration  of  Criticism 180 

A  critical  age  may  find  in  its  criticism  an  ideal  no 
less  noble  than  the  one  found  by  a  dogmatic  age  in 
its  dogma  —  Criticism  an  ideal  —  The  nature  of  revela- 
tion calls  for  it  —  The  logic  of  history  makes  it  inevi- 
table —  The  Church  must  take  criticism  seriously  or 
be  untrue  to  Christianity  —  Possible  connection  be- 
tween the  tasks  of  criticism  and  the  preparation  of 
the  churches  for  their  work  in  the  coming  age  —  The 
ideal  and  the  promise  of  criticism  divinely  given  and 
ordained. 

Indbx 189 


THE  HISTOEY  OF  THE  HIGHER  CRIT- 
ICISM or  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 


oj»ioo- 


CHAPTEE  I 

CRITICISM    AND    INTERPRETATION* 

Let  lis  fasten  our  minds  on  the  Bible  and  take  note  The  first 
of  the  thoughts  it  gives  rise  to.  We  shall  find  that  BiiSstudy. 
we  are  stirred  by  a  deep  and  lively  interest,  like  that 
which  any  great  object  excites,  when  it  would  call  us 
out  of  ourselves.  Our  interest  runs  out  toward  many 
things.  A  mighty  and  majestic  universe  has  always 
beset  the  reason  of  our  race.  But  it  was  only  a  little 
while  ago  that  we  came  to  know  the  universe  in  its 
true  character.  Man's  discovery  of  the  world  he  lives 
in  is  the  commanding  feature  of  the  mental  life  of  our 
time.  Nature,  having  so  long  and  patiently  besieged 
us,  has,  at  last,  carried  the  citadel  by  storm.  The 
walls  are  down.  Neither  indolence  nor  dogma  can 
longer  resist  Nature's  questions.  The  results  are  not 
all  good.     Eeligious  folk  are  sometimes  brought  into 

1  Literature :  The  ruling  idea  of  this  book  being  that  the 
Higher  Criticism  of  the  N.  T.  is  an  integral  part  of  the  process 
whereby  the  men  of  the  N.  T.  have  come  to  be  interpreted 
historically,  many  of  the  books  referred  to  must  necess<arily  be 
very  general  in  their  character.  Farrar,  Histonj  of  Interpreta- 
tion, 1885  ;  Imiiier,  Ilermeneutics  of  the  X.  T. ,  tr.  by  New- 
man, 1890  ;  S.  Davidson,  Sarrpd  Hrrmeneutics,  1843  ;  Diestel, 
Geschichte  d.  A.  T.,  18G9 ;  Hagenbach,  History  of  Christian 
Doctrines,  3  vols.  (The  Foreign  Theological  Library);  Alfred 
Cave,  Introduction  to  Theology  and  its  Literature,  2d  ed.,  1896. 
B  1 


HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Bible-study 
one  of  the 
mental 
interests  of 
our  day. 


All  interest- 
ing things 
have  the 
right  to  be 
known. 


deep  trouble.  Many  devout  souls,  finding  the  clear 
and  simple  horizons  of  the  old  life  blurred  and 
beclouded,  are  in  sore  distress.  Masses  of  people 
who,  in  earlier  days,  would  have  been  under  the 
influence  of  Christianity,  now  wander  about  as  sheep 
having  no  shepherd.  These  things  grieve  our  hearts. 
Still,  we  cannot  turn  back  the  tide  of  history.  The 
age  we  live  in,  along  with  its  many  grievous  faults, 
has  some  incomparable  virtues.  The  disinterested 
love  of  truth  has  never  been  so  strong;  nor  has  there 
ever  been  anything  to  compare  with  the  wide  and  eager 
study  of  our  time.  We  have  perfected  the  telescope, 
and  so  broken  through  the  barriers  of  the  skies.  We 
have  developed  the  microscope  until  the  infinite  has 
come  out  of  its  hiding-place  within  the  familiar. 
Above  us,  around  us,  beneath  our  feet,  is  a  world  of 
objects,  all  of  them  interesting,  all  of  them  command- 
ing us,  with  an  authority  that  may  not  be  gainsaid, 
to  study  them  and  so  enlarge  our  minds. 

Dogma,  the  simple,  unhesitating,  untiring  convic- 
tion regarding  the  things  unseen,  has  greatly  weak- 
ened. Some  day,  changed  in  form,  it  will  regain  its 
edge  and  force.  For  dogma  means  power  and  temper 
of  will,  depth  and  persistence  of  purpose.  And  our 
age,  with  the  inspiring  yet  terrible  difficulties  that 
are  beginning  to  confront  its  choicest  ideals,  will  find, 
sooner  or  later,  that  it  has  sore  need  of  dogma.  But, 
meanwhile,  as  we  wait  and  pray  for  a  truer  and  kind- 
lier statement  of  the  old  faith,  we  recognise  to  the  full 
the  intellectual  glory  and  splendour  of  our  epoch.  We 
are  not  outsiders  to  our  time.  We  are  within  it  and 
of  it.  And  because  we  drink  deep  of  its  spirit,  our 
world  is  full  of  interesting  things,  each  endowed  with 
a  divine  right  to  be  known.  The  depths  of  the  sea 
challenge  us  to  fathom  and  explore  them.  The  North 
Pole  does  to  men  what  the  deed  of  Miltiades  at  Mara- 


CRITICISM  AND  INTERPRETATION 


thon  did  to  Themi.stocles  —  it  will  not  let  them  sleep. 
Nature  stands  before  us  with  a  full  and  eager  mind. 
To  listen  to  her  reverently,  to  go  outside  the  bounds 
of  our  present  knowledge  in  order  to  learn  new  things, 
and  by  learning  to  enrich  and  strengthen  our  race  in 
its  struggle  against  the  conditions  that  have  enslaved 
us,  this  is  the  ideal  of  mental  life  that  inspires  and 
disciplines  the  highest  reason  of  our  time. 

To  that  ideal  our  minds  owe  unhesitating  loyalty. 
Every  object  that  makes  a  part  of  our  universe  calls 
to  us  to  come  forth  from  ourselves  that  we  may  inter- 
pret it.  And  we  reverently  acknowledge  the  divine 
right  of  the  object  to  challenge  us,  even  though  the 
time  and  strength,  the  faculties  and  opportunities  of 
knowledge,  be  denied  us.  Now  the  Bible  is  one  object 
amongst  others.  It  challenges  the  reason  in  us,  just 
as  every  great  object  does.  At  the  same  time,  its 
challenge  has  peculiar  and  compelling  power.  For 
when  reason  passes  from  the  high  scientific  study  of 
Nature  to  the  scientific  study  of  history ;  when  it  sets 
out  on  the  search  for  that  self-knowledge  which  is  the 
highest  form  of  knowledge;  and  when,  in  pursuit  of 
the  deepest  self-knowledge,  it  comes  to  the  history  or 
autobiography  of  our  race,  the  Bible  comes  upon  it  with 
irresistible  authority.  In  supreme  degree  it  has  the 
right  to  be  reverently  studied. 

The  l^ible  has  been  knit  into  the  experience  of  the 
nations  whom  God  has  put  in  control  of  the  earth. 
The  story  of  the  way  it  grew  up  is  at  the  very  heart 
of  universal  history  in  its  ancient  period,  as  that  his- 
tory moved  slowly  but  resistlessly  from  the  earliest 
Chaldean  Empire  to  Rome.  The  story  of  its  influence 
is  at  the  centre  of  universal  history  in  its  modern 
period,  as  that  history  has  marched  on  from  the  down- 
fall of  Rome  to  the  building  of  the  nations.  It  has, 
then,  a  sovereign  right  to  command  our  attention,  a 


The  Bible 
supremely 
interesiiiig 
because  of 
the  part  it 
has  played 


4  HISTOBY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

supreme  power  to  tax  and  control  our  interest.  Think 
of  it  as  a  book  set  deep  in  the  best  experience  of  our 
race.  Then,  if  we  would  truly  know  our  responsi- 
bilities and  our  capacities,  we  must  know  its  story 
intimately.  Think  of  it  as  a  literature  that  has 
strongly  coloured  and  shaped  the  conscience  and 
imagination  of  the  Occident.  As  students  of  litera- 
ture, we  must  acquaint  ourselves  Avith  its  intrinsic 
qualities  and  its  external  fortunes.  Think  of  it  as 
the  book  of  devotion  to  high  aims  and  ennobling  ends, 
from  which  the  choicest  spirits  of  the  world  have 
drawn  strength  and  inspiration.  Then,  as  men  of 
serious  mind,  avIio  will  not  let  their  science  distract 
them  from  their  main  business  —  the  art  of  living 
nobly  —  we  must  study  this  book  thoroughly.  That 
splendid  ideal  of  knowledge,  that  impassioned  desire 
to  know,  which  is  the  mental  glory  of  our  time,  laj's 
upon  us  the  obligation  to  acquaint  ourselves  with  the 
Bible  and  its  history. 
The  second  As  we  go  deeper  into  our  own  hearts,  we  discover 
Bibles-study  ^^lother  motive  at  work.  This  book,  the  book  of  Life 
to  our  fathers,  is  the  selfsame  book  of  Life  to  us, 
their  children.  As  we  look  at  it,  warm  and  joyous 
thoughts  of  the  deeds  of  God  visit  and  cheer  us. 
Through  it  the  Christ  speaks  home  to  us  a  Word  of 
God  that  comes  from  the  depths  of  the  divine  Being, 
and  tells  us  of  a  work  of  God  perfectly  wrought  out  in 
humanity.  We  have  listened  to  the  Word.  The  best 
that  is  in  us  has  said  "Amen"  to  Christ's  report  of 
good  things.  Christ's  book  has  enkindled  in  us  the 
sweet  and  masterful  hope  that  we  ourselves  may  grow 
up  to  the  doing  of  a  perfect  work.  Our  reverence  for 
ourselves,  and  our  trust  in  our  race,  bid  us  reverence 
and  love  the  Bible.  Our  hearts  stir  us  up  to  study 
and  know  it. 

And  so,  two  kinds  of  piety  join  their  forces  to  press 


CRITICISM  AND  INTERPRETATION  5 

upon  us  the  duty  of  knowing  the  Bible  intimately.^  The  desire 
The  first  is  the  historical  spirit,  a  true  kind  of  piety,  }he^Je°sir^to 
in  that  it  bids  us  know  the  words  and  deeds  of  the  be  saved, 
men  of  the  past,  because  of  their  intrinsic  worth  and 
meaning.  The  second  is  the  piety  of  the  Christian, 
which  bids  us  search  the  Scriptures  because  they  have 
a  deeper  root  in  human  experience  than  any  other 
book,  and  because  they  speak  home  to  our  hearts  as 
no  other  book  can.  Here  are  the  two  great  spiritual 
desires  of  our  nature  working  to  the  same  end.  There 
is,  indeed,  a  vulgar  desire  to  know.  Vanity,  the 
appetite  for  knowledge  that  shall  have  a  market  value, 
the  love  of  fame,  the  low  pleasure  of  the  disillusion- 
ment that  comes  from  criticism  of  the  noblest  aspects 
of  the  past,  these  things  sometimes  stain  and  soil  the 
purity  of  the  desire  to  know.  Likewise,  there  is  a 
vulgar  desire  to  be  saved.  The  subtle  egotism  that 
pervades  many  forms  of  religion,  the  wish  to  avoid 
complete  responsibility  for  one's  own  character  and 
deeds,  the  base  dread  of  the  physical  pains  of  hell,  the 
low  pleasure  of  feeling  one's  self  spiritually  insured. 


1  "  Allenthalben  widmet  man  der  Erforschung  der  Alter- 
tliiimer  ein  Studium  das  durch  eine  Art  von  Pietat  belebt  wird." 
^iankc,  Weltyeschichtc,  I,  Vorrede.  Kanke,  after  Niebuhr,  is 
the  greatest  name  in  modern  historical  study.  AMien  he  calls 
the  historical  spirit  a  kind  of  piety,  he  speaks  with  authority. 
It  is  indeed  a  new  sort  of  piety.  Its  motive  is  reverence  for  the 
total  human  past.  Its  aim  is  to  insure  to  the  men  of  the  past 
the  right  of  free  speech,  so  that  their  words  and  deeds  may  re- 
tain their  individual  character,  and  not  be  taxed  to  meet  the 
needs  of  feeling  or  fancy  in  the  present.  So  the  two  motives 
of  modern  Bible-study  are  in  unison.  The  scientific  motive  de- 
mands the  original  facts  and  thoughts  of  Scripture,  distinct  and 
separate  from  subsequent  opinion  regarding  Scripture.  The 
religious  motive  demands  the  Word  of  God  in  its  pristine  beauty. 
The  two  motives  are  at  one.  See  also,  Keim,  Jesus  of  Nasara, 
I,  p.  4  f. 


6  HLSTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER    CRITICISM 

these  things  stain  and  soil  the  purity  of  the  desire  to 
be  saved. 

Yet,  for  all  that,  these  two  desires  —  the  desire  to 
know  and  the  desire  to  be  saved  —  are  supreme  among 
the  motives  that  rightfully  mould  the  affections  and 
command  the  will.  The  pith  of  the  desire  to  know  is 
the  resolute  purpose  to  see  things  as  they  are  and  to 
report  what  one  has  seen  without  fear  or  favour.  The 
pith  of  the  desire  to  be  saved  is  the  holy  aim  to  con- 
secrate one's  self  as  Christ  was  consecrated,  to  be  per- 
fect as  God  is  perfect,  and  to  work  even  as  He  works 
for  the  redemption  of  our  race. 
The  two  Now  and  then,   as  we  read  our  Bible,    these  two 

desires  desires  conflict.     Our  devotional  reading  of  Scripture 

sometimes        _  _  .         .  .  ^ 

conflict.  is  sometimes  disturbed  by  our  scientific   interest  in 

questions  of  authorship  and  history.  The  scientific 
endeavour  to  know  the  various  parts  of  Scripture  in 
their  original  meaning  and  setting  is  sometimes 
impeded  by  our  devotional  moods.  None  the  less, 
both  desires  are  at  home  in  our  hearts.  The  Christian 
in  us  may  not  say  to  the  historical  student  in  us, 
"Thou  art  of  a  different  spirit;  I  can  have  no  fellow- 
ship with  thee !  "  To  say  so  were  to  play  false  to  the 
history  of  the  Occident.  Our  religion  could  not  have 
established  itself  in  Europe,  unless  it  had  first  made 
its  peace  with  the  philosophy  of  the  ancient  world.  A 
true  victor  never  wins  a  victory  save  through  service. 
The  Christianity  that  conquered  the  Mediterranean 
world  first  served  both  its  mind  and  its  heart.  The 
same  law  still  prevails.  By  reason  of  the  very  frame 
and  constitution  of  Occidental  history,  the  desire  to 
know  is  as  deep  in  us  as  the  desire  to  be  saved.  The 
two  desires,  spite  of  temporary  jars  and  conflicts, 
must  work  side  by  side  in  our  study  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. Otherwise,  the  Bible  will  cease  to  be  the  Word 
of  Life  for  men  of  our  kind. 


CRITICISM  AND  INTERPRETATION  7 

The  union  of  the  two  motives  for  Bible-study  sug-  Union  of 
gests  the  ruling  idea  of  this  book.  Holy  Scripture  motives, 
has  the  right  to  be  understood.  As  one  great  object  in 
a  universe  of  objects,  all  of  them  demanding  the  best 
effort  and  the  most  patient  study  of  the  student,  it 
must  be  known  as  it  is  in  itself,  whether  the  know- 
ledge agrees  or  disagrees  with  the  established  opinions 
of  the  churches.  As  the  sovereign  object  of  religious 
study,  it  asserts  the  right  in  supreme  degree.  Our 
deep  reverence  for  it  forces  us  to  interpret  it  along 
the  lines  of  its  own  meaning  and  purpose. 

It  is  indeed  true  that  Bible-study,  under  modern  Risks 
conditions,  is  attended  by  risks  and  sometimes  fol-  modern"^ 
lowed  by  losses.  A  sober-minded  scholar  cannot  Bible-study, 
think  without  pain  of  the  many  devout  souls  who 
cry  out,  —  when  criticism  shatters  some  old  statement 
or  view,  —  "  They  have  taken  away  my  Lord,  and  I 
know  not  where  they  have  laid  him."  No  matter 
how  erroneous  the  statement  may  have  been  or  imper- 
fect the  view,  the  pain  inflicted  by  its  destruction 
must  needs  bring  grief  to  the  destroyer.  A  youthful 
critic  may  take  pleasure  in  the  use  of  his  apparatus, 
even  as  a  young  surgeon  delights  to  use  his  instru- 
ments upon  the  human  body.  And  sincere  Chris- 
tians, ripe  in  faith,  see  things  most  dear  to  them,  and 
to  many  generations  of  believers  before  them,  handled 
as  intellectual  playthings,  or  at  best  as  a  chemist 
handles  elements  in  his  laboratory.  The  academic 
thinker  is  not  infrequently  far  away  from  the  body  of 
the  people,  and  through  sheer  lack  of  iuagination 
cannot  realise  the  grief  and  alarm  that  criticism  is 
causing.  But  upon  scholars  who  keep  their  hearts  as 
well  as  their  lieads,  these  things  weigh  heavily. 

There  is  something  even  more  distressing.  Num- 
bers of  Protestant  Christians,  although  they  have 
neither  ability  nor  equipment  for  critical  study,  feel 


8 


HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


No  sound 
conception 
of  authority. 


Certain 
losses  are 
inevitable. 


The  divine 
compulsion 
in  criticism. 


themselves  forced  to  dip  into  criticism.  They  have 
no  sane  conception  of  authority  that  can  take  the 
place  of  the  irrational  and  sacerdotal  conception  of 
the  Roman  Church.  As  long  as  the  Bible  stood  before 
their  eyes  clothed  with  an  infallibility  which  frowned 
down  all  questions,  tliey  lived  untroubled.  But  the 
Bible  has  now  come  within  reach  of  questions.  They 
are  forced  to  assume  a  certain  responsibility  for  the 
answers.  Lacking  the  wherewithal  of  critical  study, 
yet  carried  into  it  by  the  main  forces  of  the  day,  they 
do  not,  because  they  cannot,  work  at  criticism.  They 
merely  worry  over  it.  Criticism  enters  as  a  sort  of 
slow  fever  into  their  religion.  Their  spiritual  energies 
are  grievously  wasted. 

Yet  we  have  read  the  history  of  Christianity  to  little 
purpose,  if  we  suppose  that  the  Master  of  Life  will 
give  us  his  best  things  without  our  paying  for  them 
in  grief  and  trouble.  From  the  beginning,  the  way 
of  the  cross  has  been  the  way  of  light.  We  are  wit- 
nessing, and  with  or  without  our  will  are  helping  on, 
the  break-up  of  that  conception  of  authority  and 
inspiration  which  satisfied  and  controlled  the  Chris- 
tian reason  for  many  centuries.  Now  the  undoing  of 
a  great  conception,  one  that  has  long  shaped  and 
coloured  the  thoughts  of  men,  is  sure  to  bring  some 
distressing  things  in  its  train.  Evil  and  trouble  and 
pain  have  come  among  us.  But  we  know  well  that 
we  are  not  critics  by  grace  of  any  human  authority. 
It  is  not  by  our  own  wish  or  will  that  we  are  what 
we  are. 

The  divine  will  that  ever  and  again  drives  the 
Church  out  of  the  old  ways  and  views,  to  the  end  that 
her  eyes  may  be  opened  upon  new  fields  of  privilege 
and-  duty,  is  the  critic's  authority  and  stay.  He 
doubts  not  that  a  divine  compulsion  is  laid  upon  him. 
And  he  seeks  to  persuade  the  great  body  of  Christian 


CRITICISM  AND   INTERPRETATION 


people  that  he  is  ordaiued  of  God  to  defend  and  make 
good  the  rights  of  God's  own  Word.  If  it  can  be 
shown  that  criticism  is  the  inevitable  result,  the  saving 
necessity  of  the  Church's  life,  the  laity  will  not  be  as 
the  children  of  Ephraim,  who,  being  harnessed  and 
carrying  bows,  turned  themselves  back  in  the  day  of 
battle. 

It  is  a  commonplace  of  mental  method  that  we 
cannot  hope  to  understand  the  nature  of  any  object, 
unless  we  follow  it  through  the  stages  of  its  growth. 
We  must  know  how  it  became  what  it  is,  if  we  would 
penetrate  its  being.  This  law  of  method  has  a  force 
that  increases  in  proportion  to  the  greatness  and  scope 
of  the  object  we  are  studying.  The  more  significant 
the  idea  or  the  ideal  that  stands  before  us,  the  more 
compelling  its  claim  upon  our  attention,  the  less  shall 
we  be  able  to  understand  its  permanent  bearings, 
unless  we  acquaint  ourselves  with  the  story  of  its 
growth.  Hence,  in  a  matter  so  significant  in  itself, 
and  so  pregnant  with  consequences  as  Biblical  criti- 
cism, we  must  follow  its  history  from  the  beginning. 

Since  the  second  century  the  Christian  Scriptures 
have  been  deeply  and  devoutly  studied.  Why  they 
were  studied  in  one  way  down  to  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury, and  why  in  our  time  they  are  being  studied  in  a 
different  way,  constitute  a  single  question.  It  should 
be  clear  that  the  question  can  be  answered  only  by  a 
broad  appeal  to  history.  And  if,  through  our  reading 
of  the  liistory  of  Bible-study  at  large,  criticism  shall 
be  given  to  us  as  being  both  an  historical  necessity 
and  a  divine  ideal,  we  shall  all  be  cleansed  of  our 
vanity  and  fear.  The  conceit  of  the  critic  will  dis- 
appear when  he  realises  that  he  is  called  of  God  to  be 
a  critic.  The  fears  of  the  layman  will  vanish  when 
once  he  is  assured  that  God  is  holding  up  before  his 
Church  new  ideals  of  life  and  knowledge.     We  shall 


We  must 
knr)\v  liow  a 
thin<j  grew, 
ill  order  to 
understand 
it. 


A  broad 
appeal  to 
history 
necessary. 


10        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

be  delivered  from  mental  frivolitv,  —  the  most  hide- 
ous  of  all  intellectual  faults,  —  and  from  that  habit  of 
coquetting  with  criticism  upon  which  Christians  of  a 
certain  kind  congratulate  themselves.  For  criticism 
will  show  itself  to  be  the  defence  of  the  rights  of 
Holy  Scripture,  the  process  through  which  God  is 
emancipating  his  Word  from  servitude  to  human 
opinion. 
History  of  Nothing  short  of  the  history  of  Bible-study  as  a 

as  a  wholeT  whole  can  achieve  this  result.  If  we  confine  our  atten- 
tion to  the  years  just  past  —  a  hundred  and  fifty,  more 
or  less  —  wherein  the  "  Higher  Criticism  "  has  become 
a  distinct  discipline,  we  shall  not  be  able  to  prove  to 
ourselves  that  the  root  of  reverent  criticism  goes  as 
deep  as  the  life  of  the  Church;  we  shall  not  wholly 
allay  the  suspicion  that  the  Higher  Critics  are  men 
who,  for  insufficient  reasons,  are  breaking  the  peace 
of  the  Church.  It  may  be  said  that,  taking  the  sub- 
ject so  largely,  we  shall  run  the  risk  of  losing  our- 
selves. But  that  is  not  to  the  point.  Better  to  be 
lost  than  to  transgress  the  law  laid  down  for  us  by  the 
nature  of  the  subject  we  propose  to  take  in  hand. 

The  Christian  Bible  was  recognised  as  Holy  Writ 
during  the  period  that  saw  the  establishment  of 
Christianity  as  the  religion  of  the  Occident.^      The 

1  Speaking  broadly,  the  building  of  the  Canon  is  the  first 
chapter  in  the  history  of  Bible-study.  That  is  clearly  the  case 
in  the  O.  T.  field.  The  prophetical  literature  being  the  spiritual 
patrimony  of  Israel  after  the  Exile,  to  study  and  assimilate  it,  to 
edit  it  and  to  apply  it  to  the  needs  of  the  time,  became  the  chief 
mental  and  legal  training  of  the  Jews.  Out  of  this  Bible-study 
issued  the  fact  and  conception  of  the  0.  T.  Canon.  The  case  is 
not  so  clear  in  the  N.  T.  field.  But  only  because  the  preexist- 
ence  of  the  O.  T.  Canon,  along  with  Christianity's  speedy  de- 
tachment from  its  Jewish  base,  brought  it  to  pass  that  the  first 
and  decisive  steps  in  the  building  of  the  N.  T.  Canon  were 
quickly  taken,  when  once  the  need  of  a  N.  T.  Canon  came  to  be 


CRITICISM  AND  INTERPRETATION 


11 


doctrine  of  the  Canon  was  built  up,  not  as  a  thing 
apart,  but  as  one  part  of  a  vast  structure  of  dogma. 
No  one  thought  of  separating  the  idea  of  the  Bible 
from  the  idea  of  the  Church.  The  two  ideas  belonged 
to  a  single  organism  of  ideas.  During  the  Middle 
Ages,  while  the  Church's  estimate  of  the  Bible's 
worth  kept  going  higher,  still  the  two  ideas  clung 
close  to  each  otlier.  Hence,  if  we  are  to  take  any 
cognizance  of  Bible-study  before  the  Reformation,  we 
must  read  the  story  in  connection  with  the  whole 
mental  life  of  the  Church.  Now  the  part  played  by 
the  Bible  in  the  Reformation  period  becomes  unintel- 
ligible, if  Ave  detach  it  from  the  history  of  Bible- 
study  during  the  mediaeval  and  patristic  periods.  So, 
if  we  take  a  single  step  beyond  the  eighteenth  century, 
we  must  keep  on  until  we  reach  the  times  of  the 
Fathers. 

But  why  should  we  take  that  first  step?  Why  not 
confine  our  attention  to  the  period  of  conscious  criti- 
cism? The  specialist  in  modern  Bible-study  is 
tempted  to  do  that.  He  knows  that  criticism  as  an 
ideal  is  distinctly  a  modern  thing.  It  is  for  the  most 
part  in  the  modern  university  —  and  chiefly  in  the 
German  university  —  that  scientific  Bible-study  has 
found  both  its  standing-ground  and  its  apparatus. 
Why,  then,  in  a  book  so  small  as  this,  attempt  to 
cover  so  much  ground?  Why  not  neglect  the  com- 
paratively unimportant  periods  of  Bible-study  and 
give  all  our  time  to  the  work  of  getting  clear  views 
concerning  the  evolution  of  the  critical  ideal  and 
methods  throughout  the  professedly  critical  period? 

There  are  two  sufficient  reasons  against  this  pro- 
cedure.    In  the  first  place,  we  should  go  wide  of  our 


The  idea 
of  the  Bible 
and  the 
idea  of  the 
Church. 


Specialist's 
point  of 


view. 


Reasons 
against  the 
specialist. 


felt.     For  a  brief  description  of  this  process,  see  Mivzzey,  The 
Rise  of  the  New  Testament. 


12        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

mark.  The  purpose  of  the  book  is  to  show  that  criti- 
cism is  a  sacred  obligation,  a  divine  calling.  We 
should  have  no  hope  of  manifesting  this,  if  we  went 
no  deeper  into  the  history  of  Bible-study  than  the 
eighteenth  century.  Criticism  must  prove  that  it  is 
not  "an  alien,  not  an  intruder  upon  the  field  of  devout 
Bible-study;  that,  on  the  contrary,  it  is  doing  the 
same  work  the  Fathers  and  Scholastics  and  Reformers 
did,  and  doing  it  better. 

In  the  second  place,  we  should  be  disregarding  the 
nature  of  our  subject,  if  we  took  its  history  so  nar- 
rowly. Even  now,  when  criticism  has  fully  won  the 
right  of  free  speech,  the  Bible  is  not  the  critic's  book. 
It  never  will  be.  It  is  the  dearest  possession  of  all 
Christians.  The  critic  might  as  well  try  to  get  away 
from  his  own  shadow  as  to  get  away  from  the  common 
Christian  feeling  about  the  book  to  whose  interpreta- 
tion he  has  given  himself.  If  he  does  nothing  more, 
he  must  at  least  account  for  that  common  feeling,  or 
else  leave  himself  unexplained.  He  cannot  under- 
stand himself  without  a  knowledge  of  the  whole  his- 
tory of  Bible-study.  There  is,  then,  something  better 
than  a  tactical  reason  for  taking  our  subject  very 
broadly,  although  that  alone  would  suffice.  There 
is  a  logical  reason.  The  very  nature  of  the  subject 
forbids  our  taking  its  history  narrowly.^ 
Accidental  Part  of  the  phrase  "Higher  Criticism"  is  a  mere 
phrase* '°      accident.     Criticism,   in  its  earliest  stage,   took  the 

"Higher        form  of  text-criticism.     When,  at  a  more  advanced 
Criticism." 

1  Any  view  we  may  take  must  needs  be  one-sided.  The 
critical  movement  in  the  life  of  the  churches  is  one  of  momen- 
tous significance.  We  ourselves,  who  attempt  to  estimate  and 
assess  it,  are  in  the  thick  of  it.  If  we  think  ourselves  judicial 
and  "objective,"  for  the  most  part  we  deceive  ourselves.  Our 
view  cannot  but  be  partial  and  provisional.  We  appeal  from 
ourselves  to  a  later  age  that  shall  be  better  able  to  judge  soundly. 


CRITICISM  AND  INTERPRETATION 


13 


stage,  it  entered  upon  the  inner  study  of  Scripture,  it 
called  itself  "  liigher "  in  order  to  distinguish  itself 
from  the  criticism  of  the  text  as  a  ''lower,"  or  pre- 
paratory form  of  study.  The  adjective  is  the  result 
of  a  bare  historical  incident,  having  no  merit  in  itself, 
deserving  to  be  retained  —  if  retained  at  all  —  solely 
on  the  ground  of  present  convenience.^ 

"Criticism,"  the  other  part  of  the  title,  is  not 
wholly  pleasing.  It  stirs  up  needless  prejudice,  thus 
partly  defeating  its  own  end.  A  certain  kind  of 
mental  conceit  is  often,  sometimes  not  unjustly,  asso- 
ciated with  the  word.  On  some  accounts,  "  The  His- 
tory of  Modern  Bible-study  "  would  be  a  better  title 
than  "The  History  of  the  Higher  Criticism."  For 
"  criticism  "  is  one  form  of  Bible-study.  The  Fathers 
and  the  Reformers  interpreted  the  Bible  by  one 
method.  They  were  taught  of  God.  We  interpret  the 
Bible  by  another  method.  We  fully  believe  that  God 
is  teaching  us.  Our  study  is  one  with  their  study  in 
its  motive  and  its  reverence.  It  is  superior  to  theirs, 
we  think,  both  in  its  ideal  and  its  apparatus.  The 
term  "  criticism "  is  somewhat  objectionable.  It 
breaks  up  the  continuity  of  Bible-study.  It  sets 
modern  students  off  by  themselves,  and  repels  simple 
but  deep-hearted  Bible  readers.  Yet,  for  the  present, 
at  least,  the  terra  is  indispensable.  It  is  as  signifi- 
cant of  our  day  as  the  word  "evolution."     It  is  not. 


Term 

"  criticism ' 

necessary. 


1  It  might  be  well  to  drop  the  word  "  Higher"  altogether. 
Devout  lay  people  take  offence  at  it  as  advertising  a  superior 
form  of  knowledge.  If  the  adjective  involved  a  principle,  we 
should  have  to  retain  it,  spite  of  the  popular  error.  But  so 
long  as  no  principle  is  at  stake,  it  is  possibly  worth  the  while 
of  scholars  to  remind  themselves  of  Rom.  14:21.  The  word 
"Higher"  answers  to  no  present  need.  It  makes  neither  for 
clearness  nor  precision.  "Text-criticism"  and  "Criticism" 
serve  every  purpose. 


14 


HI  STOUT  OF  THE  HIGHER   ClilTICISM 


Criticism 
and  inter- 
pretation. 


Definition  of 
criticism. 


like  the  adjective  "higher,"  a  mere  incident  of  his- 
tory. On  the  contrary,  it  is  as  necessary  to  us,  just 
now,  as  the  term  "philosophy"  was  to  the  Greeks. 
We  must,  then,  retain  it,  while  taking  pains,  by  our 
work  and  behaviour,  to  commend  it. 

We  shall  accomplish  our  desire,  if  we  can  prove  that 
criticism  has  in  view  a  thoroughly  positive  end,  that 
back  of  the  critical  method  which  analyses  and  tests 
the  sources  of  our  information,  stands  the  historical 
spirit  whose  aim  is  to  see  the  past  just  as  it  was  in 
itself,  to  see  the  course  of  sacred  history  —  if  we  may 
be  so  bold  —  as  its  Author  sees  it.  It  Avill  then  be 
plain  that  criticism  is  a  superior  method  of  inter- 
pretation, a  better  road  to  the  original  meanings  of 
Holy  Scripture.  The  exegesis  of  the  Church,  from 
the  third  century  onward,  thought  of  the  Bible  either 
as  a  book  of  divine  law  and  dogma,  or  as  a  book  of 
devotion.  Christians  went  to  Scripture  to  get  an 
answer  to  the  needs  of  the  Church  as  a  thinking,  and 
governing,  and  praying  Church.  We  have  the  same 
needs.  But  the  difference  between  the  old  exegesis 
and  the  new  is  this.  The  old  exegesis  took  the  Bible 
out  of  its  historical  setting,  and  removed  it  from  its 
relations  to  definite  times  and  concrete  situations, 
causing  the  men  of  the  Bible  to  speak  altogether  in 
the  language  of  the  men  of  a  far  later  time.  The  aim 
of  our  exegesis  is  to  find  the  Bible  at  home  within  its 
history,  and,  having  found  it  there,  to  listen  patiently 
and  reverently  while  it  tells  its  story  in  its  own 
tongue. 

We  define  criticism,  therefore,  as  that  mental 
process  in  modern  Christianity  whereby  the  historic 
character,  the  true  nature,  of  divine  revelation  is 
appreciated  and  manifested.  The  historic  spirit,  the 
desire  to  know  the  wliole  past  even  as  it  was  in  itself, 
comes  in  as  a  noble  servant  raised  up  by  God  to  help 


CRITICISM  AND   INTERPRETATION 


15 


the  Church  to  truly  know  her  Bible,  and  thus  pay  her 
debt  to  the  Author  of  Sacred  Scripture.  Christianity 
stands  and  falls  with  the  Bible.  For  we  believe  our 
Scriptures  to  be  the  book  of  witness  to  the  true 
quality  of  ultimate  religious  experience,  and  to  the 
character  and  being  of  God  as  revealed  through  tliat 
experience,  — the  authentic  record  of  the  blessed  prom- 
ise and  the  saving  presence  of  the  perfect  life  on  earth. 
The  well-being  of  the  Church  depends  upon  the  right 
interpretation  of  the  Bible.  We  must  seek  to  know 
it  from  within  and  along  the  lines  of  its  own  meaning 
and  purpose.     That  is  our  most  sacred  obligation. 

Criticism  is  Bible-study,  or  interpretation,  as  it 
must  needs  be  pursued  in  an  historical  age.  We  con- 
ceive revelation  as  a  historical  process.  In  order  to 
understand  the  Bible  in  its  own  sense,  we  seek  to  find 
each  book  of  Scripture  in  its  time,  and  place,  and  cir- 
cumstance, and  discover  the  original  shape  and  colour 
of  its  autlior's  feeling  and  thought.  The  lower,  or 
preparatory  criticism  aims  at  the  original  text,  cleared 
of  corruptions  and  accretions.  The  Higher  Criticism, 
the  original  text  having  been  found,  aims  at  the  his- 
torical interpretation  of  Scripture.  And  to  study  the 
Bible  critically  is  to  assert  its  right  to  be  understood, 
to  be  taken  in  its  own  sense. 

With  this  definition  to  guide  us,  we  may  venture 
upon  the  broad  field  before  us  without  fear  of  losing 
ourselves.  Seeing  that  the  old  view  of  the  Bible  was 
strongly  disposed  to  take  the  Bible  out  of  its  histori- 
cal frame,  and  seeing  that  the  new,  or  critical,  view 
seeks  to  put  the  books  of  Scripture  within  that  frame, 
our  road  is  already  laid  out  for  us.  We  are  to  trace 
the  steps  that  brought  the  Church  to  the  point  where 
critical  study  became  an  absolute  necessity,  if  the 
thought  and  feeling  of  the  Bible  were  to  be  rightly 
apprehended.     Then  we  must  consider  the  conditions 


Well-being 
of  the 
Church  and 
interpreta- 
tion. 


Criticism 
true  to  the 
Scriptures. 


Summary  ol 
the  history. 


16        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

that  made  criticism  possible.  And,  finally,  we  shall 
try  to  understand  —  so  far  as  it  is  possible  for  men  to 
understand  a  movement  whereof  their  own  lives  con- 
stitute a  part  —  the  course  taken  by  the  critical  study 
of  the  New  Testament  during  the  hundred  and  fifty 
years  just  passed.^ 

1  While  we  have  no  need  to  remind  ourselves  of  the  great 
gains  of  specialism  in  the  N.  T.  field,  it  is  timely  to  recall  the 
dangers.  The  old  theological  "encyclopaedia"  having  fallen 
into  discredit,  the  various  departments  or  disciplines  of  N.  T. 
study  are  in  some  danger  of  temporarily  forgetting  their  mutual 
relations.  Thus  Hilgenfeld  writes,  "Die  Isagogik  der  alten 
Kirche  war  durchaus  hermeneutisch^''  (Einleitung  in  d.  N.  T*., 
p.  1).  And  Holtzmann  to  the  same  intent  (Einleitung,  p.  1). 
The  terms  are  not  happy.  The  fault  in  the  ancient  Introduc- 
tions is  not  that  they  are  "  exegetical "  but  that  the  exegesis  to 
which  they  contributed  was  thoroughly  unhistorical  in  its  aim 
and  methods.  If  we  use  our  terms  carefully,  we  may  say  that 
Introduction  is  intrinsically  exegetical.  Its  purpose  is  to  de- 
termine the  time,  place,  author,  and  relationships  of  the  N.  T. 
books,  to  the  end  that  we  may  enter  upon  the  study  of  them  from 
the  right  or  historical  point  of  view.  Nor  has  a  sound  Intro- 
duction any  real  surplusage  over  and  above  the  needs  of  exe- 
gesis. The  appearance  of  a  surplusage  is  either  due  to  the  fact 
that  a  given  book  is  considered  too  much  by  itself,  apai't  from 
the  N.  T.  as  a  whole,  or  else  it  contains  material  which  might  as 
well  be  found  in  a  dozen  other  places  as  in  a  N.  T.  Introduction. 


CHAPTER  II 


THE     bible's     definition     OF    REVELATION     AND     THE 
IDEAL    OF    BIBLE-STUDY    THAT    GOES    WITH    IT  ^ 


We  must  not  think  that  the  Bible  has  played  a  pas- 
sive part  in  the  history  of  criticism.  It  has  been  in 
large  measure  its  own  keeper.  The  Old  Testament 
Scriptures  did  not  lie  under  the  hand  of  the  Jewish 
Church,  waiting  for  the  opinion  of  the  rabbins  to  give 
them  worth.  The  New  Testament  Scriptures  did  not 
lie  under  the  hand  of  the  Catholic  Church,  until  recog- 
nition by  tliat  Church  should  insure  to  them  their 
standing. 

It  is,  indeed,  a  common  saying  that  the  Church 
came  before  the  Bible.'*  If  rightly  taken,  the  saying 
contains  a  helpful  truth ;  wrongly  taken,  an  imposing 
fallacy.  The  Church  did  not  create  the  Scriptures. 
She  appreciated  them  and  recognised  their  incom- 
parable value.  And  her  recognition  resulted  in  what 
we  call  the  Canon  of  Holy  Scripture.     The  destruc- 

1  Literature  :  Sanday,  Inspiration,  1893,  and  The  Oracles  of 
God;  Riehm,  Messianic  Prophecy,  2d  ed.,  tr.  1891  ;  Ladd, 
What  is  the  Bible  f  4th  ed.,  1890  ;  Maurice,  What  is  Revela- 
tion ? 

2  This  was  first  said  in  High  Church  circles,  and  was  meant 
to  be  an  arraignment  of  Protestantism.  Of  late  it  has  been 
widely  used,  in  order  to  lessen  the  strain  of  criticism.  If  it  is 
meant  to  correct  the  mechanical  separation  between  the  idea  of 
the  Church  and  the  idea  of  the  Bible,  it  is  helpful.  But,  as 
commonly  employed,  it  would  bo  difficult  to  find  a  looser  state- 
ment. 

o  17 


The  Bible 
its  own 
guardian. 


"The 
Church 
before  the 
Scriptures.' 


18        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

tion  of  the  Jewish  State  by  the  Babylonians,  the  Exile 
of  the  Jews,  caused  the  first  step  in  the  building  of 
the  Canon  to  be  taken.  For  centuries  the  Prophets 
of  Israel  criticised  and  condemned  the  life  of  their 
nation.  Their  assessments  and  valuations  ran  straight 
against  the  popular  desires  and  tendencies.  The 
Exile  verified  their  prophecies.  Common  minds,  says 
Locke,  like  earthen  walls,  resist  the  strongest  batteries. 
The  preaching  of  the  Prophets,  unaided  by  external 
fact,  could  not  have  carried  conviction  with  the 
people.  But  the  Exile  brought  history  over  to  the 
side  of  the  Prophets,  proving  that  their  words  were 
God's  words.  Thus  the  prophetic  Avritings  came  to  be 
appreciated  as  their  incomparable  merit  demanded. 
The  build-  So  it  would  be  an  absurdity  to  say  that,  in  the 

ing  of  the       pioneer  work  of  building  the  Canon  of  Holy  Scripture, 
^*''°°*  the  Church  came  before  the  Bible.    The  Jewish  Church 

did  not  create  the  prophetical  books,  but  admired 
them,  and,  by  admiration,  became  capable  of  appre- 
ciating them  as  they  deserved  to  be  appreciated.  The 
Prophets  were  installed  in  human  opinion  as  the 
teachers  of  humanity.  Their  word  was  acknowledged 
to  be  God's  Word,  their  criticism  of  society  His  criti- 
cism, their  great  hope  His  personal  promise.  The 
Jewish  Church  was  endowed  with  spiritual  perception. 
And  through  that  perception  the  prophetical  literature 
canonised  itself. 

In  the  building  of  the  New  Testament  Canon  and 
the  formation  of  the  Christian  Bible,  things  took  the 
same  course.  The  Saviour  came  and  fulfilled  the 
prophecies,  embodying  their  words  in  history  and  life. 
His  chosen  men,  filled  with  his  spirit  and  carried,  by 
his  death  and  resurrection,  outside  the  bounds  of 
Jewish  opinion,  gave  to  the  world  his  Gospel,  the  glad 
news  that  God  had  kept  His  promise  and  that  the 
Kingdom  of  God  had  been  set  up  amongst  men.     The 


THE  BIBLICAL   IDEA    OF  REVELATION      19 


Church  of  the  second,  third,  and  fourth  centuries, 
while,  in  one  sense,  identical  with  the  Church  of  the 
Apostles,  in  another  sense  was  distinct.  It  was  one 
and  the  self-same  Church,  just  as  the  Church  of  our 
time  is  one  and  the  self -same  Church.  If  criticism 
be  reverently  done,  it  is  a  work  of  exactly  the  same 
order  as  the  work  done  by  the  Catholic  Church  when 
she  built  the  Canon.  The  Church  set  the  books  of 
Scripture  apart  from  all  other  books,  making  them  a 
class  by  themselves,  because  she  perceived  their  eter- 
nal value  as  witnesses  to  the  Christ.  She  appreciated 
the  New  Testament  Scriptures,  and  through  lier 
appreciation  they  canonised  themselves.  And  our 
study,  inspired  and  supported  by  the  desire  to  see  the 
Oracles  of  God  in  their  pristine  beauty,  has  the  same 
spiritual  quality.     We  are  critics  to  please  the  Bible. 

The  saying  that  the  Church  came  before  the  Bible, 
as  it  is  commonly  used,  can  lead  only  to  mental  con- 
fusion. So  far  as  clear  thought  is  concerned,  it  either 
says  nothing  at  all,  or  it  says  something  that  is  Avorse 
than  an  out  and  out  error  by  reason  of  its  specious 
confusion  of  error  and  truth.  We  cannot  affirm  that 
the  Church  came  before  the  Scripture,  if  thereby  it  is 
meant  that  the  action  of  the  Church  gave  them  tlieir 
value  and  authority.  Their  authority  is  theirs  by 
divine  right,  because  they  are  the  record  of  God's 
self-revelation.  Their  merit  is  an  intrinsic  merit, 
belonging  as  truly  to  them,  and  to  them  alone,  as  the 
qualities  of  a  triangle  belong  to  the  triangle. 

The  Bible  has  not  played  a  passive  part  in  the  his- 
tory of  Bible-study.  From  the  days  when  the  Scrip- 
tures canonised  themselves  down  to  our  own  time,  they 
have  had  a  strong  hand  in  the  making  of  their  own 
fortune.  As  little  as  the  sun  is  idle  before  the  human 
eye  that  gazes  upon  the  beauty  of  the  sunset;  as  little 
as  the  stars  are  idle  when  our  hearts  leap  up  toward 


Criticism  in 
relation  to 
the  Canon. 


The  Scrip- 
tures do  not 
borrow  their 
authority 
from  the 
Church. 


20 


HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


The  Bible 
criticising 
itself. 


their  splendour,  just  so  little  is  the  Bible  inactive 
while  the  Church  insures  its  worth  and  standing. 
The  Bible  was  its  own  keeper  while  it  was  being  can- 
onised. It  is  its  own  keeper  now  that  it  is  being 
criticised.  The  ''criticising  Church"  —  if  we  know 
and  weigh  our  words  —  is  as  noble  a  title  as  the  "  can- 
onising Church."  The  process  of  canonising  and  the 
process  of  criticising  the  Scriptures  have  mental  and 
spiritual  qualities  in  common.^  Through  the  former, 
God  led  the  world  to  accept  the  Christian  Bible  as 
the  book  wherein  we  can  learn  to  think  about  God  as 
He  thinks  about  Himself.  Through  the  latter  God  is 
teaching  men  to  take  the  Bible  in  its  own  sense. 

Criticism,  then,  is  not  a  process  thrust  upon  the 
Bible  from  without.  The  Bible  demands  criticism 
just  as  truly  to-day  as  it  demanded  canonisation  in 
the  third  century.  For,  without  modern  Bible-study, 
the  true  nature  of  our  Scriptures  cannot  be  fully  under- 
stood. If  it  were  possible  for  us  to  take  up  the  Bible 
as  we  take  up  the  latest  book  issued  from  the  press, 
could  we  but  open  it  with  eyes  unvexed  by  dogmatic 
prejudice,  we  should  see  at  a  glance  that  it  is  a 
thoroughly  human  book,  issuing,  as  every  truly  human 
document  must,  from  the  vital  movements  of  humanity. 
So  it  must  be  studied  as  a  human  book  if  we  would 
reach  its  deepest  meanings.  In  the  matter  of  time  it 
ranges  through  fifteen  centuries.     In  the  matter  of 

1  It  has  already  been  said  that  the  canonisation  of  the  sacred 
books  was  itself  a  form  of  Bible-study.  The  literature  of  the 
O.  T.  and  N.  T.  imposed  itself  upon  the  religious  consciousness 
as  the  standard  of  religious  feeling.  The  end  was  accomplished 
through  study.  With  this  process  the  critical  process  has  much 
in  common.  For  just  as  the  sovereign  worth  of  the  Scriptures 
forced  the  world  to  canonise  them,  so  is  the  selfsame  worth 
forcing  the  Christian  reason  to  know  them  from  within.  And 
knowledge  from  within,  in  contrast  with  knowledge  at  second- 
hand, is  criticism. 


TUE  BIBLICAL   IDEA    OF  REVELATION      21 

feeling  it  ranges  from  Samuel,  hewing  Agag  in  pieces, 

to  our  Lord  on  the  cross,   praying  for  his  enemies. 

But  at  every  point  in  its  range  the  Bible  is  deeply 

human.     Samuel  is  a  real  man.     The  Saviour  is  not 

less  a  man,  but  more.     Our  Scriptures  are  not  like  the 

Hindoo  sacred  epics,  wherein  a  great  cloudy  mist  of 

abstraction  settles  down  upon  history,  making  it  look 

like  a  mysterious   island  looming  through  the  fog. 

The  Bible  is  close  to  history.    The  turns  of  its  thought  Historical 

and  feeling  took  place  in  connection  with  the  great  study. 

crises  of  history.^    It  is  itself  the  greatest  of  histories. 

It  describes  a  vast  mixed  movement  of  human  life, 

through  which  the  creative,  redemptive  purpose  of 

God  shines  as  the  body  of  heaven  for  clearness.^ 

Because  the  Word  of  God  has  come  to  us  through 
the  medium  of  vital  history,  and  not  through  the 
broodings  and  speculations  of  men  who  cut  themselves 
off  from  the  common  life  in  order  to  deepen  and  clarify 
their  thought,  it  is  rich  iu  colour.  The  Oriental 
world  stands  behind  it.    The  Oriental  man  lives  in  it. 

For  the  same  reason,  it  is  the  book  of  the  common   Bible  not 
life.     The  sincerest  wisdom  of  the  Hindoos,  even  the  '"^  Y'^^^  ^°^ 

.    ,  .  religious 

ripest  wisdom  of  the  Greeks,  is  flawed  by  the  distinc-   specialists. 

tion  between  a  truth  meet  for  the  average  man  and  a 
truth  open  only  to  the  religious  specialist.  The  Hin- 
doo and  the  Greek  did  not  give  the  world  its  Bible. 
That  is  God's  gift  and  Word  to  the  average  man,  who 
does  the  world's  common  work  and  pays  the  taxes  that 

1  Riehm,  Messianic  Prophecy,  p.  1.33, 135,  208  ;  Baur,  Church 
History  of  the  First  Three  Centuries,  I,  pp.  1-5  ;  Westcott,  The 
Bible  in  the  Church,  1893,  p.  2. 

2  Tiie  ().  T.  is  a  better  guide  than  the  N.  T.  into  the  nature 
and  meaning  of  revelation.  No  great  idea  or  conception  can  be 
clearly  understood,  if  it  is  approached  only  when  it  is  full  grown. 
The  0.  T.  as  the  book  of  beginnings,  the  book  mediating  be- 
tween the  N.  T.  and  the  religions  of  the  world,  offers  to  the 
student  peculiar  advantages. 


22 


HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


The  Bible 
not  a  book 
of  specula- 
tion. 


keep  its  roads  in  order.  The  greatest  men  of  the  Old 
Testament  were  citizens  and  statesmen.  The  Master 
of  men  was  a  carpenter.  His  favoured  disciples  got 
no  small  part  of  their  schooling  through  the  discipline 
of  a  fisherman's  life  passed  upon  an  exceptionally 
stormy  and  dangerous  lake.  The  religious  specialist 
is  not  found  in  the  ranks  of  the  true  men  of  the  Gos- 
pel. The  philosopher  does  not  rule  in  Israel.  God 
"  hath  put  down  the  mighty  from  their  seat  and  hath 
exalted  the  humble  and  meek.  The  bows  of  the 
mighty  are  broken  and  they  that  stumbled  are  girded 
with  strength."  The  Bible  is  the  love-story  of  the 
Lord  of  Life,  who  meets  us  in  the  beaten  highway  of 
history,  telling  us  all  that  is  in  His  heart. 

Because  the  Bible  is  mainly  a  book  of  histories,  it 
is  chiefly  a  book  of  action.  The  men  of  the  Bible  are 
doers  of  deeds  rather  than  speculators  on  thought. 
The  doubts  they  meet  and  wrestle  with  are  practical, 
not  philosophic  doubts.^  The  dissolving  of  doubts  is 
attained  not  so  much  through  clearer  thinking  as 
through  deeper  living.  The  way  of  the  Scriptures,  the 
way  of  light,  is  not  the  road  of  abstract  reasoning, 
but  the  road  of  the  cross. ^  God  reveals  Himself  at 
the  crises  of  humanity.  His  word  and  His  deed  go 
together,  until  His  deepest  word  and  His  final  deed  are 
brought  into  unity  through  Christ.  It  is  on  this 
ground  that  the  Bible  is  called  a  religion  of  redemp- 
tion,—  revelation  being  the  story  of  God's  creative 
life  imparting  itself  under  historical  conditions.  The 
men  of  the  Bible  seek  to  build  up  the  Kingdom  of 
God  amongst  their  fellows.     They  do  not  seek  to  save 

1  Even  Job  is  uot  a  philosophic  book  in  the  Greek  sense. 
The  speculative  element  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  has  been  greatly 
overestimated.  The  theology  of  the  Bible  might  fairly  be  called 
Pastoral  Theology,  in  contrast  with  speculative  divinity, 

2  Is.  63  J  1  Cor.  2  :  2. 


THE  BIBLICAL  IDEA    OF  REVELATION       23 

their  souls  by  fleeing  into  the  desert.     God's  life  is 
one  of  redemptive  af^tion.     So  is  tlieirs. 

The  men  of  the  Bible  are  deeply  individual,  each  of  Individual- 
them  rooted  firmly  in  his  time  and  place.     Quite  as   go-iptures. 
little  as  the  men  of  Homer  are  they  personifications 
of  religious  abstractions.    They  are  genuine  flesh  and 
blood,  —  the   spirit   of    God    shining   through   their 
humanity.      Their   style   of   speech,   their   turns   of 
thought  are  individual.     The  body  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, outside  the  Gospels,  is  made  up  of  the  letters 
of  St.  Paul.     Now,  the  law  that  the  style  is  the  man 
never  had  a  more  perfect  illustration.     His  style  is 
himself;  it  is  like  no  other  style  in  the  Bible,  as  char- 
acteristic as  the  style  of  Thucydides,  or  Heraclitus,  or 
Carlyle.     The  style  of  the  Johannine  writings  tells 
the  story  of  an  individual  life,  of  an  intense  nature 
that  has  been  led  through  the  storms  of  experience 
into  a  childlike  simplicity  of  mind  and  clearness  of 
intuition.     The  Bible  is  a  book  of  individual  minds. 
A   single,    controlling,    divine    purpose   holds   them 
together.     Their  books  compose  into  one  great  book 
of  witness  to  the  reality  and  the  quality  of  the  saving 
life.     Yet  each  of  them  is  stuck  deep  in  his  time  and 
place,  as  deep  as  Thucydides,  as  deep  as  Shakespeare. 
Yea,  deeper.    For  each  of  them  took  a  definite  field  of 
human  experience  for  his  province,  and  going  to  the 
bottom  of  the  human  found  the  divine.^ 

It  follows  that  the  human  author  plays  a  very  great  The  human 
part  in  the  Bible.     If  we  go  to  our  Bible  for  our  defi-   scripture, 
nition  of  revelation,  if  we  do  not  first  block  out  and 
finish  our  definition  in  regions  of  experience  more  or 
less  remote  from  the  experience  of  the  men  of  the 

1  The  growth  of  the  Scriptures  is  thus  the  supreme  case  under 
the  law  governing  all  catholic  or  classic  literature.  Only  the 
books  that  go  to  the  root  of  their  own  time  can  be  a  possession 
for  all  time. 


24 


HISTORY  OF  THE  niGHEJt   CRITICISM 


Epistle  to 
Philemon. 


The  human 
and  the 
divine. 


Bible  and  theu  proceed  to  fasten  our  definition  upon 
the  Scriptures,  we  shall  see  that  the  human  author  in 
the  process  of  revelation  is  indispensable  to  the  Divine 
Avithor.  It  is  not  enough  to  say  that  the  Bible  has  a 
human  side.  We  must  say  that  the  Bible  is  a  deeply, 
an  intensely  human  book.  The  little  letter  to  Phile- 
mon, —  from  one  point  of  view  a  mere  literary  episode, 
written  by  the  Apostle  on  the  spur  of  the  moment, 
aimed  at  a  private  need,  given  to  the  Church  from 
the  treasure  of  a  pious  family,  a  fragment  out  of  a 
life,  accidentally  picked  up  and  borne  along  by  a  great 
religious  movement,  —  this  little  letter,  rightly  taken, 
becomes  one  of  the  most  instructive  books  of  Scripture, 
when  once  we  have  made  up  our  minds  to  take  our 
definition  of  revelation  from  no  other  source  than  reve- 
lation itself.  The  Bible  defines  the  Bible  as  a  book 
wherein  the  Divine  Author  demands  the  human  author, 
and  bids  us  see  to  it  that  we  let  not  the  human  author 
pass  out  of  our  sight;  lest,  perchance,  fondly  thinking 
that  thus,  and  thus  alone,  shall  we  have  a  i)ure  Word 
of  God,  we  deceive  ourselves  and  listen  all  the  while 
to  the  echoes  of  our  own  words. 

The  humanness  of  the  Bible,  then,  is  as  essential 
as  its  divineness.  Herein  the  book  is  one  with  the 
Christ  whose  book  it  is.  And  we  shall  find  that  the 
history  of  Bible-study  keeps  in  step  with  the  history 
of  opinion  regarding  the  person  of  Christ.  Even  as 
the  Church  for  a  long  time  neglected  and  sometimes 
for  a  while  came  near  forgetting  the  humanity  of  our 
Lord,  even  so  she  neglected  and  almost  made  light 
of  the  human  authors  in  his  book.  But  if  once  we 
clearly  understand  ourselves  as  Christians,  we  shall 
feel  sure  that  all  is  over  with  Christianity,  if  we  per- 
manently lose  or  undervalue  the  humanity  of  our 
Lord.^      The   deepest   scepticism    of   our   race  lurks 

1  Domer'.s,  Lehre  von  der  Pprson  Christi,  is  the  best  and  most 
thorough  treatment  of  this  point. 


THE  BIBLICAL   IDEA   OF  REVELATION      25 


within  the  belief  that  it  is  impossible  for  God  to  come 
near  us,  unless  we  shall  lirst  have  ceased  to  be  our- 
selves. Because  it  is  so  deep  a  scepticism,  it  is  wont 
to  palm  itself  oif  on  less  thorough  forms  of  doubt  as 
the  deepest  truth,  persuading  men  that  they  must 
needs  abandon  the  common  life  in  order  to  find  the 
divine  life,  that  they  must  go  out  of  humanity  if  they 
would  take  fast  hold  on  deity.  But  this  is  not  the 
truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus.  All  is  lost,  if  we  lose  the 
humanity  of  our  Lord.  We  slip  back  from  the  high 
and  holy  ground  of  revelation  into  the  hopeless  morass 
of  speculative  heathenism.* 

Then  the  Bible,  no  longer  the  book  of  witness  to 
the  simplicity  and  intelligibleness  of  God,  no  longer 
the  book  of  divine  promises  touching  a  Kingdom  of 
God  that  shall  come  on  earth,  no  longer  the  book  of 
that  Christ  who  is  humanity's  Amen  to  all  the  divine 
promises,  — the  Bible  ceases  to  be  the  Bible,  the  joy- 
ous and  refreshing  study  of  God's  search  for  us;  and 
adds  itself  to  the  number  of  those  great  books  that  tell 
us  the  fine  yet  pathetic  story  of  man's  search  —  the 
search  of  the  philosopher,  and  the  sage,  and  the  monk, 
and  the  mystic  —  after  God. 

If,  therefore,  we  would  do  justice  to  the  humanity 
of  our  Saviour,  we  must  do  justice  to  the  human  and 
historical  character  of  his  book.  Criticism,  that  is  to 
say  the  kind  of  Bible-study  that  seeks  an  historical 

1  One  of  the  most  significant  debates  of  our  century  is  that 
between  Mansel  and  Maurice.  (Mansel,  Limits  of  Eeligious 
Thnu(jht;  Maurice,  miat  is  liecelation  ?  Lives  of  Mansel  and 
Maurice.)  Heresy  makes  strange  bedfellows.  Mansel's  idea  of 
God  is  cognate  to  Occam's.  It  requires  an  imperial,  monasti- 
cal,  papalised  Church  to  work  it.  It  practically  divorces  the 
ethics  of  the  common  life  from  the  idea  of  God.  And  it  ends 
by  setting  up  a  magnificent  clerical  establishment  which  keeps 
the  lay  world  from  throwing  the  light  of  reason  upon  the  prob- 
lems of  Biblical  study. 


Humanity 
of  Christ. 


Historical 
cliaracter 
of  Christ's 
book. 


26        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

interpretation  of  Scripture,  is  the  Master's  personal 
interest  and  cause.  Without  the  historical,  human 
book  the  historical,  human  Christ  ceases  to  stand  out 
clearly  before  the  eyes  of  his  people.  The  Bible, 
therefore,  defines  revelation  as  an  historical  process. 
With  this  definition  a  certain  ideal  of  Bible-study  goes 
along. 

Plato,   comparing  the  teaching  powers  of  a  book 
with  those  of  a  living  teacher,  declared  that  the  book 
is  self -helpless,  at  the  mercy  of  the  reader.     But  this 
is  not  true.     No  great  book  is  at  the  mercy  of  its 
readers.     When  Plato  said  so,  he  was  looking  at  the 
short  run  of  things.     Look  to  the  long  run,  and  his 
own  books  prove  the  contrary.      They  are  his  deep- 
est thought  eternised,  lifted  above  the  changes  and 
chances  of  the  short  Athenian  day.     Students  have 
misread  them,  carrying  into  them  their  own  wisdom 
and  ignorance,  making  Plato  speak  a  language  widely 
All  great        different  from  his  own.    But  only  for  a  while.    Sooner 
own^Lter-''     °^  later  a  great  book  becomes   its  own  interpreter, 
preters.  Pressing  steadily  upon  the  minds  of  those  who  love 

it,  it  creates  at  last  a  true  taste  for  itself.  The  price 
the  world  has  to  pay  for  the  ownership  of  a  great  book 
is  the  labour  of  understanding  it.  And  no  matter  how 
long  the  payment  of  the  debt  may  be  put  off,  sooner 
or  later  it  must  be  paid  to  the  uttermost  farthing. 

So  has  it  been  with  our  Scriptures.  Because  the 
Church  of  an  earlier  time  saw  in  them  a  value  incom- 
parable, and  felt  in  them  a  power  of  God  not  to  be 
withstood,  she  canonised  them,  made  of  them  a  Bible. 
And  because  the  Church  of  our  day,  the  self-same 
Church,  but  living  under  changed  conditions  and 
facing  new  tasks,  has  the  self-same  reverence  for 
them,  she  is  being  led  into  the  paths  of  criticism.  In 
all  this  mental  movement,  the  Bible  does  not  play  a 
passive  part.     It  is  its  own  keeper. 


CHAPTER   III 

HOW   CRITICISM    BECAME   NECESSARY  ^ 

It  is  the  basal  idea  of  Christianity  that  the  Sacred  The  basal 
Scriptures,  being  the  book  of  Witness  to  the  promise   chHgfian- 
and  presence  of  the  perfect  life  amongst  men,  is  the   ity. 
standard  whereby  the  Church  must  test  her  doctrine 
and  her  life.    This  does  not  mean  that  the  Bible  alone 
is  our  religion,  if  by  "  the  Bible  alone  "  we  mean  to 
take  the  Scriptures  out  of  relation  with  the  continuous 
experience  of  Christians.     It   does  mean,    however, 
that  Christian  experience,  perpetuating   and   propa- 
gating itself  through  the  ages,  shall  again  and  again 
bring  itself  to  book,  searching  out  all  possible  contra- 
dictions between  its  own  ideals  and  the  ideals  attested 
in  the  Scripture  as  God's  own  desire  for  his  people.* 

The  aim  of  this  chapter  is  to  follow  the  first  steps 
in  the  history  of  Higher  Criticism  by  showing  how  it 
happened  that  the  Bible,  taken  away  from  its  history, 
was  interpreted  in  ways  foreign  to  its  own  sense. 

1  Literature  :  Harnack,  Hist,  of  Dogma  ;  Allen,  Christian 
Institutions,  1897  ;  Moeller,  Church  History,  Vol.  I  ;  Westcott, 
The  Bible  in  the  Church,  1893  ;  The  Canon  of  the  N.  T.,  6th 
ed.,  1889 ;  Credner,  Geschichte  des  neutestamentUchen  Kanon, 
1847  ;  Loofs,  Leitfaden  z.  Studium  der  Dogmengeschichte,  2. 
Au«.,  1890. 

2  Briggs,  The  Study  of  Holy  Scripture,  1899.  c.  1  ;  Macpher- 
son,  Christian  Dogmatics,  pp.  24-29  ;  Kaftan,  The  Truth  of  the 
Christian  lieliginn,  tr.  1894,  I,  pp.  188-202  ;  Schaff,  Creeds  of 
Christendom,  III,  s.v.  "Scriptures." 

27 


28 


HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Like  inter- 
preted by 
like. 


Bible  not  a 

sacerdotal 

book. 


At  the  outset  we  lay  it  down  as  a  fundamental  law 
of  interpretation  that  like  must  be  interpreted  by  like. 
This  holds  good  in  the  study  of  single  books  of  the 
New  Testament.  There  must  be  a  mental  and  spir- 
itual affinity  between  the  book  and  the  student,  if  a 
first-rate  piece  of  exegetical  work  is  to  be  done.*  It 
holds  good  of  the  New  Testament  as  a  whole.  In  the 
long  run  men  think  what  they  are.  They  will  inter- 
pret their  great  text-books  along  lines  parallel  with 
the  main  motion  of  their  own  experience.  And  if  that 
experience  has  a  different  shape  and  colour  from  the 
experience  of  the  men  who  wrote  the  books,  the  books 
will  be  misinterpreted  accordingly. 

Now  the  Bible  is  not  a  sacerdotal  book.  It  was  not 
written  by  priests.  It  is  true  that  the  Old  Testament 
contains  a  large  sacerdotal  element.  But  the  soul  of 
the  Old  Testament  is  that  view  of  the  divine  and  hu- 
man life  which  God  gave  to  the  world  through  the 
Prophets.  And  as  regards  the  New  Testament,  along 
with  the  other  great  qualities  that  distinguish  it 
amongst  the  "  Sacred  Books  "  of  the  race,  this  quality 
is  noteworthy,  namely,  its  marvellous  freedom  from 
the  sacerdotal  view  of  life.  Our  Master  himself  was 
of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  not  the  tribe  of  Levi  (Heb.  7. 14). 
The  men  through  whom  he  founded  the  Church  and 
wrote  the  New  Testament  were,  in  almost  every  case, 
men  of  lay  birth  and  breeding.^     This  does  not  lead 


1  This  law  of  spiritual  affinity  shows  itself  very  plainly  when 
a  commentator  like  Meyer  undertakes  to  cover  the  entire  N.  T. 
While  his  exegetical  methods  are  the  same  at  every  point,  the 
spirit  in  him  answers  the  mood  and  purpose  of  one  book  better 
than  another.  A  man  who  shall  write  a  great  commentary  on 
the  Fourth  Gospel  is  not  likely  to  do  so  well  with  Romans. 

2  The  text  might  have  said  that  this  is  true  without  excep- 
tion. The  legend  about  John's  priestly  descent  is  too  shadowy 
to  have  any  value. 


HOW  CRITICISM  BECAME  NECESSARY       29 


US  to  say  that  the  New  Testament  forbids  the  existence 
of  a  special  priesthood  in  the  Church  of  Christ.  It 
does,  however,  justify  tlie  assertion  that  the  New 
Testament,  if  it  would  be  interpreted  in  its  own  sense, 
cannot  permit  a  body  of  priests  to  exercise  an  ex- 
clusive right  of  interpretation,  or  anything  like  it. 
Through  the  training  and  schooling  of  the  Apostles, 
through  the  very  nature  of  his  book,  the  Master  of 
Life  plainly  warned  his  Church  that,  if  ever  she 
should  bring  herself  to  the  point  where  the  priesthood 
should  claim  such  rights,  he  would  put  down  the 
usurpation  with  his  own  hands,  carrying  his  book 
into  a  region  of  freer  life  and  more  generous  light. 

Criticism,  the  historical  interpretation  of  the  New 
Testament,  became  necessary  and  inevitable  when  the 
ecclesiastical  doctrine  of  Tradition  carried  the  Church 
to  a  position  where  her  interpretation  of  Scripture 
required  radical  correction.  It  came  to  pass  that 
a  vast,  highly  organised  and  centralised  hierarchy 
claimed  to  hold  in  its  hands  the  keys  to  the  meanings 
of  Holy  Writ.  Their  being  as  a  hierarchy  was  out 
of  keeping  with  the  deepest  thoughts  of  Scripture. 
Their  interpretation,  moulded  by  their  being,  could 
not  fail  to  do  grievous  wrong  to  the  mind  of  Scripture. 
Yet  they  put  forward  their  own  interpretation  as 
infallible,  —  that  is,  as  sufficient,  not  needing  and  not 
open  to  a  searching  examination.  The  ideal  of  the 
Church's  life  demands  a  true  interpretation  of  the 
Bible.  But  the  mediaeval  Church's  Tradition  was  not 
a  true  interpretation;  it  sorely  obscured  and  often 
destroyed  the  liistorical  character  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. The  mind  of  the  Church  was  far  away  from 
the  original  language  and  the  original  feelings  of  the 
Sacred  Books.  The  human  authors  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment passed  nearly  out  of  sight. 

The  greatest  work  that  men  do  is  often  bound  up 


Hierarchy 
holding 
keys  of 
Bible 
knowledge. 


Unman 
authors  of 
Scripture 
neglected. 


30 


HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Historical 
aspect  of 
revelation 
obscured. 


with  great  errors.  The  Catholic  Church  could  not 
have  made  her  wonderful  contribution  to  the  history 
of  Christianity,  unless  she  had  developed  the  dogma 
of  authority.  It  was  the  growing  sense  of  authority 
that  gave  her  strength  and  coherence,  making  possible 
her  victory  over  the  Empire.  It  was  the  same  sense 
of  authority  that  gave  us  our  Bible.  For  without  it 
we  should  have  had  no  Canon.  Under  the  mental 
conditions  of  the  time,  it  was  impossible  to  achieve  a 
fixed  list  of  Sacred  Books  by  means  of  historical  study. 
The  spirit  of  scholarship  was  too  weak,  the  spirit  of 
dogma  too  strong.  Men,  as  a  whole,  cared  little  for 
the  historic  aspect  of  revelation.  They  cared  every- 
thing for  immediate  religious  certitude  and,  in  case 
they  had  any  capacity  for  speculation,  for  religious 
philosophy.  The  Gnostics,  against  whom  the  Church 
built  up  the  doctrine  of  the  Canon,  had  no  interest  in 
questions  of  fact.  Their  whole  concern  was  with  the 
philosophy  of  religion.^  And,  beyond  question,  they 
embodied  the  deepest  and  freest  mental  tendency  of 
the  time.  So  the  Church  could  not  guard  herself 
against  the  Gnostics  without  and  the  Gnostical  ten- 
dencies within,  by  historical  investigation.  Nothing 
but  authority  could  save  the  day.  Thus  alone  could  a 
fixed  or  canonic  list  of  Sacred  Books  be  achieved.^ 


1  A  knowledge  of  Gnosticism  is  essential  to  our  understand- 
ing of  the  Catholic  Church's  motives  and  methods.  For  Gnos- 
ticism enables  us  to  see  what  direction  the  speculative  view  of 
Christianity  might  have  taken,  had  it  not  been  bridled  by  Tradi- 
tion. Credner,  Canon,  pp.  2-68  ;  Harnack,  Hist,  of  Dogma,  II, 
pp.  1-38. 

2  By  this  it  is  not  meant  that  there  was  no  historical  motive 
or  element  in  the  process  by  which  the  Catholic  Church  settled 
the  Canon.  Her  traditions  regarding  the  N.  T.  books  were  sub- 
stantially correct  (Harnack,  Chronologie  der  altchrist.  Litera- 
tur,  1897,  xi).  But  the  mental  bias  was  dogmatic,  rather  than 
historical. 


HOW  CRITICISM  BECAME  NECESSARY       31 

But  with  the  fixing  of  the  Canon  went  along  the  a  fixed 
necessity  of  a  fixed  and  authoritative  interpretation  of  jnt^^p^reta- 
the  Sacred  Books.     The  intellectual  conditions  of  the   tion. 
age  forbade  sound  interpretation  on  any  great  scale. 
The  allegorical  interpretation,  in  one  form  or  another, 
was  the  inevitable  tendency  of  the  age.^     Now,  alle- 
gory is  a  system   whereby  the  interpreter  can  first 
put  any  given  set  of  ideas  into  Scripture,  and  then, 
with  a  grand  air  of  authority,  take  them  out  of  Scrip- 
ture.    Under  the  hand  of  a  bold,  allegorical  method 
the  sacred  text  lay  helpless.     To  use  the  blunt  speech 
of  a  later  day,  it  was  no  better  than  a  wax  nose.    The 
interpreter  could  shape  it  and  twist  it  as  he  pleased. 

Philo  transformed  Plato  into  an  Athenian  jNfoses 
and  Moses  into  a  Sinaitic  Plato.-  The  Gnostics  found 
their  several  systems  in  our  Lord's  parables.^  Even 
the   Catholic   interpreters   freely  allegorised.*     The 

1  The  single  exception  is  the  "school"  of  Antioch  (Farrar, 
Hist,  of  Interpretation,  pp.  210-218  ;  Kihn,  Theodore  von  Mops- 
nestia,  1880).  Strictly  speaking,  it  was  not  a  "  school. "  Theo- 
dore was  a  genius,  as  far  above  his  time  in  his  scholarship  as 
Aristotle  was  above  his  time  in  his  theory  of  evolution.  If 
Chrysostom  and  others  were  exegetically  superior  to  the  Alex- 
andrian interpreters,  it  was  not  so  much  because  their  methods 
were  better  as  because  they  had  no  passion  for  philosophy. 
Chrysostom's  splendid  interest  in  ethics  set  him  in  tune  with 
the  N.  T.  ;  he  had  no  philosophical  system  to  import  into  the 
Scriptures. 

2  Farrar,  Lect.  3. 

'  Irenseus  (in  library  of  Ante-Nicene  Fathers),  I,  1,  3.  The 
Gnostics,  in  dealing  with  the  0.  T.,  were  free  from  allegory  and 
therefore  comparatively  strong.  But  they  gained  their  freedom 
by  sacrificing  the  0.  T.,  and  so  tearing  Christianity  from  its 
foundation  (Bigg,  The  Christian  Flatonists  of  Alexandria y  1886, 
p.  30). 

*  Justin  Martyr  did  not  directly  allegorise.  But  by  means 
of  wholesale  "  typology"  he  so  overrode  the  historical  sen.se  of 
the  O.  T.  that  the  difference  between  him  and  Philo  is  hardly 


32 


HISTOET  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Prevalence 
of  allegory 
made  this 
necessary. 


Historical- 
grammati- 
cal interpre- 
tation not 
possible. 


bent  and  bias  of  the  time  was  altogether  that  way. 
Now,  the  Catholic  Church  stood  for  the  common 
Christian  feeling,  thought,  and  law.  But  if  the  alle- 
gorical method  was  to  be  given  free  play,  no  wide- 
spread community  of  life  and  purpose  was  attainable. 
Given  the  allegorical  principle,  freedom  of  interpreta- 
tion meant  chaos.  Every  man  would  do  that  which 
was  right  in  his  own  eyes.  Every  school  would  derive 
from  Scripture  a  different  set  of  ideas.  No  broad 
common  ground  could  be  taken  and  held.  Chaos  in 
Bible-study,  anarchy  in  Church  government,  would 
have  been  the  upshot. 

If  the  Catholic  Church  was  to  do  her  great  work  of 
subjecting  Europe  to  a  common  spiritual  law,  a  fixed 
interpretation  was  not  a  whit  less  necessary  than  a 
fixed  list  of  Sacred  Books.  The  grammatical-histori- 
cal methods  of  interpretation  to  which  our  own  period 
has  attained,  put  the  keys  to  the  meanings  of  Scripture 
where  they  rightly  belong  —  in  the  control  of  the 
Bible  itself.  The  well-nigh  total  lack  of  such  methods 
in  the  early  centuries  forced  the  Church  into  her  line 
of  action.  She  insisted  upon  a  fixed  and  authorita- 
tive interpretation.^ 

In  those  days  no  one  dreamed  of  setting  the  Bible 
against  the  Church  or  the  Church  against  the  Bible. 
The  antithesis  would  have  disabled  the  Christianity 
of  the  period.  Even  a  clear  mental  distinction,  with- 
out separation,  of  Church  and  Bible  would  have  been 
untimely.     The  crying  need  of  the  hour  was  a  vast 


worth  mentioning.  If  Tertullian  and  the  men  of  the  North 
African  school  did  not  allegorise,  it  was  simply  because  they  had 
no  dogmatic  need  that  drove  them  into  allegory.  They  had  no 
principles  that  could  have  withstood  the  slightest  dogmatic 
pressure. 

1  Tertullian,  77ie   Prescription  against  Heretics;  Irenaeus, 
VI,  3,  4  ;  Vincent,  Commonitory. 


HOW  CRITICISM  BECAME  NECESSARY       33 

society  held  together  by  common  feeling  and  common 
purpose.  The  tactics  and  discipline  of  the  Roman 
legion  which  made  the  Empire  possible,  the  magnifi- 
cent capacity  of  the  Latins  for  law  which  made  the 
Empire  the  storehouse  of  civilisation,  was  not  a  bit 
more  essential  to  the  welfare  of  the  world  than  the 
splendid  coherence,  the  superb  dogmatic  drill,  of  the 
Catholic  Church.  The  Bible  was  accepted  as  the  final 
court  of  appeal  in  matters  of  faith.  ^  Upon  any  other 
ground  the  Church  would  not  have  been  Cliristian. 
But  there  was  no  thought  of  pulling  Church  and  Bible 
apart.  The  orderly  life  of  the  one  was  assumed  to  be 
the  indispensable  medium  of  the  mind  and  heart  of 
the  other. 

Long  afterward  the  clear  distinction  between  the  No  distinc- 
authority  of  the  Church  and  the  authority  of  the  Bible  authority  o° 
became   necessary.      At  the  Reformation  the  times  Church  and 
demanded  it.    But  in  the  period  in  which  Christianity   Scripture.  ° 
established  itself  as  the  religion  of  the  Mediterranean 
world,  history  had  no  use  for  the  distinction.      The 

1  Irenseus,  II,  27  ;  28,  7. 

Origen  declared  that  Holy  Scripture  contained  the  sum  of 
all  the  knowledge  about  God  that  is  attainable  in  this  life.  The 
highest  exercise  of  the  sanctified  reason  is  to  understand  it. 
(Redepenning,  Oru/enes,  1841  ;  1°  Abth.,  pp.  259,  270-272.) 

Augustine,  Contra  Epist.  Man.,  ch.  6  (the  famous  declara- 
tion, "I  would  not  have  believed  the  Scriptures  ").  But,  con- 
tending with  the  Donatists,  he  insisted  on  the  Scriptures  as  the 
supreme  authority  (11,  3,  4).  Theoretically,  he  leaned  toward 
the  ecclesiastical  principle  (Dorner,  A.  ;  Auf/ustinns,  1873,  pp. 
237-244).  But  practically,  he  assumed  that  the  sovereign  wis- 
dom of  life  was  embodied  in  the  Scriptures.  —  Vincent,  Com- 
monitori/,  ch.  2,  27,  29.  Cassiodorus  expressed  the  estimate 
of  the  Bible  that  passed  out  of  the  patristic  period  into  the 
mediaeval  period  when  he  described  the  patristic  expositions  of 
Holy  Writ  as  the  Jacob's  Ladder  by  means  of  which  men  were 
to  ascend  to  the  contemplation  of  God  (De  Inst.  Div.  Lit., 
Pr(xf.). 


34        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Idea  of 
infallibility. 


Bible 

isolated. 


life  of  the  Church  was  conceived  as  a  mystical  total. 
It  was  an  organism.  Holy  Scripture  was  indeed  its 
heart.  But  the  heart  did  not  say  to  the  hands,  "I 
have  no  need  of  thee !  "  Tradition,  the  fixed  interpre- 
tation of  an  authoritative  Church,  was  thought  to  be 
inseparable  from  a  true  and  saving  knowledge  of  God's 
Word. 

All  the  conditions  of  the  period  favoured  the 
growth  of  the  ancient  idea  of  inspiration.  In  like 
manner  they  fostered  the  idea  of  infallibility.  The 
ideas  are  inseparable.  If  the  random,  destructive 
work  of  the  sectarian  allegorists  was  to  be  successfully 
opposed,  if  there  was  to  be  an  absolute,  final  body  of 
dogma,  then  the  Sacred  Books  from  which  the  dogmas 
drew  their  texts  had  to  be  conceived  as  an  infallible 
body  of  theological  truth.  But  if  it  was  to  be  valued 
as  infallible,  the  human  author  must  go  out  of  it,  or, 
at  least,  hide  in  the  closet.  So  the  Divine  Author  of 
Scripture  was  left  in  exclusive  possession.  When  the 
Biblical  student  entered  the  Bible,  God  alone  met 
him.  The  doctrine  of  inspiration  tended  to  remove 
the  Sacred  Books  from  all  direct  connection  with  the 
minds  and  wills  of  their  authors. 

The  Bible  was  dogmatically  isolated.  It  could  not 
be  treated  as  a  human  document.  It  was  held  to  be 
inspired.  And  inspiration,  as  antiquity  conceived  it, 
drew  infallibility  in  its  train.  So,  as  an  infallible 
book,  the  Bible  is  out  of  vital  touch  with  reason.  For 
reason  exists  to  ask  questions  and  to  insist  upon 
rational  answers.  But  the  Scriptures  were  lifted 
beyond  the  reach  of  searching  questions.^  Reason 
must  kneel,  not  investigate. 


1  The  ancient  doctrine  of  inspiration  was  shaped  in  a  period 
when  reason  was  passing  into  bankruptcy  (Windelband,  Hist, 
of  Philosophy,  pp.  210-229> 


HOW  CRITICISM  BECAME   NECESSARY       35 

The  inspiration  and  infallibility  of  Holy  Scripture   infallibility 
entailed  the  infallibility  of  the  Church.     Scriptural  aiKUnS-^ 
infallibility  without  ecclesiastical  infallibility  is  no  ^'jj^jy,^^ 
better  than  a  mighty  sword  without  a  mighty  hand  to 
wield  it.     It  hangs  on  a  wall  as  a  glorious  memory. 
It  cannot  do  its  work.     In  the  long  run,  the  rule-of- 
thurab  infallibility  of  extreme  Protestantism  will  not 
serve.     The  dogma  of  infallibility,  if  it  is  to  play  an 
efficient  and  enduring  part  in  history,  must  have  an 
infallible  Church  to  translate  it  into  law.    Hence,  the 
doctrine  of  ecclesiastical  infallibility  developed  along- 
side the  doctrine  of  Scriptural  infallibility.     It  was 
not,   however,   systematically  elaborated.     It  lay  in 
the  mind  of  Christendom,  awaiting  the  opportunity 
for  a  free  career. 

The  opportunity  came  when  the  seat  of  empire  was 
removed  from  Kome  to  Constantinople  and  the  emper- 
ors lost  their  hold  on  the  West.  Political  life,  of  a 
high  and  ennobling  order,  went  off  the  stage.  The 
State  passed  into  spiritual  bankruptcy.  The  Church 
of  the  Occident,  thus  emancipated  from  secular  con- 
trol and  secured  against  rival  interests,  found  a  field 
cleared  for  the  development  of  the  sacerdotal  prin- 
ciple. And  that  necessitated  the  steady  exaltation  of  The  Papacy. 
the  Papacy.  Mohammed  came  to  the  aid  of  the  Popes. 
His  gift  was  only  less  helpful  than  the  gift  of  Con 
stantine.  Lopping  off  from  Christendom  all  the 
ancient  centres  of  Christianity  in  Asia  and  Africa, 
he  insured  to  the  Popes  a  practical  monopoly  of 
spiritual  prestige.^ 

Tradition,  as  the  ancient  Church  handed  the  idea 
over  to  the  mediaeval  Church,  meant  a  conception  of 
the  Bible  as  infallible,  applied  to  life  and  carried  into 
practice  by  a  Church  believed  to  be  infallible.    If,  now, 

1  Allen,  Christian  Institutions,  ch.  11  ;  also,  the  standard 
church  histories. 


36        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Centralisa- 
tion of 
Tradition. 


The  classic 
period  of 
Tradition. 


the  idea  of  Tradition  was  to  be  logically  worked  out  and 
carried  forward  historically  into  all  its  consequences 
of  good  and  evil,  a  thorough-going  centralisation  of  the 
Church  was  necessary. 

External  history  enabled  the  Papacy  to  achieve  the 
required  centralisation.  Down  to  the  eleventh  cen- 
tury, all  the  conditions  of  the  West  strongly  encour- 
aged the  power  of  Tradition.  The  success  of  Tradition 
depended  upon  a  body  of  dogmatic  interpretations  of 
Scripture  pressed  steadily  upon  the  mind  by  a  sov- 
ereign ecclesiastical  authority.  Any  teacher  will  tell 
us  that,  to  have  efficient  education,  we  must  have  con- 
centration of  purpose.  If  a  given  idea  is  to  take  fast 
hold  upon  the  child's  mind,  rival  interests  and  pur- 
suits must  be  kept  at  a  distance.  The  calamity,  the 
temporary  calamity,  that  sits  like  a  ghost  at  our  mod- 
ern feast  of  education,  is  mental  interference.  In  the 
primary  and  grammar  schools  intellectual  persistence 
is  attained.  In  the  high  school  a  crowd  of  conflicting 
attractions  rush  upon  the  mind,  and  the  capacity  of 
attention  is  dissipated.  The  multiplication  of  inter- 
ests makes  steady  pressure  of  any  sort  a  thing  very 
hard  to  get. 

But  mental  concentration  was  the  natural  tendency 
in  the  early  Middle  Ages.  The  poverty  of  interests 
gave  the  principle  of  Tradition  full  sway.  The  cities 
of  the  West  had  fallen  into  ruins.  Now,  we  know 
that  throughout  antiquity  the  city,  in  opposition  to 
the  country,  was  the  place  where  mind  rubbed  against 
mind,  where  impressions  jostled  each  other,  where 
ideas  moved  and  changed.  The  country  was  the  place 
where  the  mind  handed  on,  without  alteration,  the 
views  it  had  obtained  from  the  past.  In  the  modern 
world,  the  antithesis  does  not  hold  good;  because  the 
marvellous  mechanical  inventions  of  our  age  have 
largely  conquered  space.     But  in  the  ancient  and  the 


now  CRITICISM  BECAME  NECESSARY 


37 


raediseval  world,  it  held  true,  without  exception,  that 
the  city  was  the  place  where,  by  reason  of  the  conflict 
of  impressions  and  tlie  collision  of  ideas,  a  single  idea 
found  the  most  difficulties  in  the  way  of  its  making  a 
permanent  fortune.  The  countryman's  life  and  con- 
ditions fostered  conservative  views  and  gave  an  easy 
monopoly  to  any  strong  and  persistent  conception.^ 

The  cities  were  in  ruins,  commerce  at  a  standstill. 
The  great  public  and  private  libraries  of  the  Roman 
world  had  perished.  It  was  not  possible  that  there 
should  be  any  large  and  free  mental  life.  It  is  true 
that  the  monasteries  earned  the  undying  gratitude  of 
scholars  by  giving  a  safe  asylum  to  literature.  Against 
the  attacks  of  barbarous  men,  and  the  pressure  of  bar- 
barous times,  they  maintained  the  continuity  of  men- 
tal life.  None  the  less,  mental  life  was  at  a  low  ebb. 
The  scope  of  the  mind  was  narrow.  The  quantity  of 
knowledge  was  small. ^  The  desire  to  know  filled  a 
comparatively  small  space  in  the  field  of  attention. 
The  pressure  of  facts  on  the  mind  was  slight.  The 
times  were  free  from  mental  interference.  Tradition 
throve. 

Everybody  knows  that  the  mental  conditions  of  our 
own  period  are  fundamentally  different.      The  uui- 


External 
conditions. 


Contrast 
with  our 
time. 


1  Sparta  and  Athens  are  the  contrasted  types  in  Greek  life  ; 
Palestinian  and  Alexandrian  Judaism  in  Jewish  life.  Droysen 
brings  out  the  function  of  the  city  in  the  economy  of  the  ancient 
world,  in  his  masterly  Gesch.  d.  Hdlenismiis.  It  was  not  an 
accident  that  made  Alexandria  the  centre  of  the  religious  specu- 
lation of  the  Empire  (Windelband,  Hist,  of  Philosophy,  p.  213). 

2  The  history  of  the  map  of  the  world  is  a  good  index  to  the 
shrinking  or  enlarging  body  of  earth-knowledge.  Beazeley, 
The  Daicn  of  Modern  Geography,  1807  ;  Fiske,  Discovery  of 
America,  I,  ch.  3. 

A  trustworthy  witness  to  the  state  of  mental  productivity 
down  to  the  year  1000  is  found  in  the  statistics  of  exegetical 
work  (Schaff,  Hist,  of  the  Christian  Church,  IV,  p.  602). 


38 


HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Ideas  fixed. 


Bible  iso- 
lated in 
a  double 
sense. 


verse,  whose  infinitude  and  majesty  we  have  just  begun 
to  discover,  presses  resistlessly  upon  our  minds.  The 
whole  world,  for  the  first  time  made  one,  sends  a  vast 
body  of  conflicting  ideas  and  conceptions  against  all 
established  ideas.  Many  sore  evils  follow.  Faith 
lacks  stability.  The  spirit  loses  its  simplicity.  Clear 
vision  is  often  obscured.  Creeds  are  as  wax  in  the 
hands  of  circumstance.  Believers  drift  without  sail 
and  anchor,  or  lie  on  the  flats.  But  the  gain  far  out- 
weighs the  loss.  The  infinitude  of  truth  becomes  a 
passion.  On  all  sides  we  hear  the  wind  of  God  blow- 
ing. And  we  know  that  we  do  not  know  whence  it 
comes  and  whither  it  goes.  Humility  becomes,  in 
the  realm  of  the  mind,  the  same  cardinal  virtue  it  has 
always  been  in  the  sphere  of  Christian  ethics.  Our 
minds  are  kept  open  to  the  new  things  that  God  has  in 
store. 

How  unlike  the  early  Middle  Ages !  The  men  of 
that  time  had  no  appetite  for  the  learning  that  lies 
remote  from  narrow,  practical  ends.  They  altogether 
lacked  our  lively  feeling  for  a  world  of  things  stand- 
ing close  to  knowledge,  although  not  yet  come  into 
knowledge.  They  had  no  eager  sense  of  the  truths 
that  stand  at  the  door  and  knock.  ^  Free  from  severe 
mental  pressure,  the  ruling  ideas  became  stiff  and 
unelastic.  In  the  absence  of  an  expanding  know- 
ledge, there  was  no  need  to  reconstruct  interpretations. 
The  principle  of  a  fixed,  authoritative  interpretation 
of  Scripture  found  everything  to  its  liking. 

The  Bible  was  now  isolated  in  a  double  sense.  It 
had  been  dogmatically  isolated  by  the  ancient  Church, 
through  the  doctrines  of  inspiration  and  infallibility. 

1  The  text  does  no  injustice  to  scholars  like  Bede  and  Eri- 
gena.  They  had  a  profound  sense  of  the  majesty  of  divine  truth. 
But  their  knowledge  came  to  them  along  the  line  of  Tradition. 
There  was  no  mental  competition. 


HOW  CRITICISM  BECAME  NECESSARY       39 

Jerome's  dream  illustrates  this.  ''How  can  Horace  Jerome's 
go  with  the  Psalter?  "  he  writes,  "  Virgil  with  the  Gos-  '^'®*™- 
pels,  Cicero  with  the  Apostle?  .  .  .  Many  years  ago, 
when  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven's  sake  I  had  cut 
myself  off  from  home,  parents,  sister,  relations,  and, 
harder  still,  from  the  dainty  food  to  which  I  had  been 
accustomed;  and  when  I  was  on  my  way  to  Jerusalem 
to  wage  my  warfare,  I  still  could  not  bring  myself  to 
forego  the  library  which  I  had  formed  for  myself  at 
Rome  with  great  care  and  toil.  And  so,  miserable 
man  that  I  was,  I  would  fast  only  that  I  might  after- 
ward read  Cicero.  After  many  nights  spent  in  vigil, 
after  floods  of  tears  from  my  inmost  heart,  after  the 
recollection  of  my  past  sins,  I  would  once  more  take 
up  Plautiis.  And  when  at  times  I  returned  to  my 
right  mind,  and  began  to  read  the  Prophets,  their  style 
seemed  rude  and  repellent.  I  failed  to  see  the  light 
with  my  blinded  eyes;  but  I  attributed  the  fault  not 
to  them,  but  to  the  sun.  While  the  old  serpent  was 
thus  making  me  his  plaything,  about  the  middle  of 
Lent  a  deep-seated  fever  fell  upon  my  weakened  body, 
and  while  it  destroyed  my  rest  completely,  — the  story 
seems  hardly  credible,  —  it  so  wasted  my  unhappy 
frame  that  scarcely  anything  was  left  of  me  but  skin 
and  bone.  Meantime,  preparations  for  my  funeral 
went  on;  my  body  grew  gradually  colder,  and  the 
warmth  of  life  lingered  only  in  my  throbbing  breast. 
Suddenly  I  was  caught  up  in  the  spirit  and  dragged 
before  the  judgment  seat  of  the  Judge;  and  here  the 
light  was  so  bright,  and  those  who  stood  around  were 
so  radiant,  that  I  cast  myself  upon  the  ground  and 
did  not  dare  to  look  up.  Asked  who  and  what  I  was, 
I  replied,  '  I  am  a  Christian.'  But  he  who  presided 
said:  'Thou  liest;  thou  art  a  follower  of  Cicero,  and 
not  of  Christ.  For  "  where  thy  treasure  is,  there  will 
thy  heart  be  also." '     Instantly  I  became  dumb,  and 


40        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

amid  the  strokes  of  the  lash  —  for  he  had  ordered  me 
to  be  scourged  —  I  was  tortured  more  severely  still  by 
the  fire  of  couscience,  considering  with  myself  that 
verse,  'In  the  grave  who  will  give  thee  thanks?  '  Yet 
for  all  that  I  began  to  cry  and  bewail  myself,  saying, 
'Have  mercy  upon  me,  0  Lord;  have  mercy  upon  me.' 
Amid  the  sound  of  scourges  this  cry  still  made  itself 
heard.  At  last  the  bystanders,  falling  down  before 
the  knees  of  him  who  presided,  prayed  that  he  would 
have  pity  upon  my  youth,  and  that  he  would  give  me 
space  to  repent  of  my  error.  He  might  still,  they 
urged,  inflict  torture  on  me,  should  I  ever  again  read 
the  works  of  the  Gentiles.  Under  the  stress  of  that 
awful  moment  I  should  have  been  ready  to  make  still 
larger  promises  than  these.  Accordingly,  I  made  oath 
and  called  upon  his  name,  saying,  'Lord,  if  ever  again 
I  possess  worldly  books,  or  if  ever  again  I  read  such, 
I  have  denied  thee.'  Dismissed,  then,  on  taking  this 
oath,  I  returned  to  the  upper  world,  and,  to  the  sur- 
prise of  all,  I  opened  upon  them  eyes  so  drenched 
with  tears  that  my  distress  served  to  convince  even  the 
incredulous.  And  that  this  was  no  sleep  nor  idle 
dream,  such  as  those  by  which  we  are  often  mocked,  I 
call  to  witness  the  tribunal  before  which  I  lay,  and 
the  terrible  judgment  which  I  feared.  May  it  never 
hereafter  be  my  lot  to  fall  under  such  an  inquisition ! 
I  profess  that  my  shoulders  were  black  and  blue,  that 
I  felt  the  bruises  long  after  I  awoke  from  my  sleep, 
and  thenceforth  I  read  the  books  of  God  with  a  zeal 
greater  than  I  had  previously  given  to  the  books  of 
men."  ^ 

1  It  would  not  be  safe  to  take  Jerome  literally.  By  nature 
he  was  a  religious  impressionist,  a  lover  of  the  luxury  of  feeling. 
And  he  associated  with  devout  women  more  than  was  good  for 
him.  Yet,  after  the  necessary  discount  is  made,  his  "dream  "  is 
typical  of  the  tendency  in  the  Western  Church.     No  scholar  of 


BOW  CRITICISM  BECAME  NECESSARY       41 

Jerome's  dream  shows  how  the  Scriptures  were 
dogmatically  isolated.  Between  the  fifth  and  the 
twelfth  centuries  circumstances  operated  powerfully 
in  favour  of  practical  isolation.  The  desire  to  know, 
scientific  curiosity,  existed,  but  that  was  all.  The  Little 
motive  of  knowledge  was  weak,  the  materials  scanty,  curiosity 
Even  the  knowledge  about  the  authors  and  circum- 
stances of  the  New  Testament  books  had  shrivelled  to 
a  bare  handful  of  facts. ^  This  small  body  of  informa- 
tion was  considered  sufficient.  It  had  the  prestige  of 
a  sacred  antiquity  and  the  authority  of  an  infallible 
Church  to  guarantee  it.  Men  felt  no  desire  to  go 
beyond  it.  They  lacked  the  motives  that  should  lead 
them  to  study  the  New  Testament  as  a  history.  They 
lacked  the  knoAvledge  that  holds  our  idea  of  the  Bible 
close  to  the  ground  of  a  human  and  historical  process. 
So  the  isolation  of  circumstances  came  to  the  help  of 
the  dogmatic  isolation  of  Scriptures.  The  Bible  was 
separated  from  human  literature  by  forces  external  as 
well  as  by  forces  internal.  It  was  cut  off  from  the 
possibility  of  historical  investigation. 

Owing  to  this  twofold  isolation  of  Scripture,   it 

the  Greek  Church  could  have  had  such  a  dream.  The  suspicion 
of  pagan  learning  became  deep-seated.  "  It  was  the  custom 
among  some  monks,  when  they  were  imder  the  discipline  of 
silence  and  desired  to  ask  for  Virgil,  Horace,  or  any  other  Gen- 
tile work,  to  indicate  their  wish  by  scratching  their  ears  like 
a  dog,  to  which  animal,  it  was  thought,  the  pagans  might  be 
reasonably  compared "  (Lecky,  Hist,  of  European  Morals, 
Appleton,  1877,  2,  p.  203).  Boccaccio  was  badly  frightened 
(about  13G0)  by  a  monk  who  foretold  his  speedy  death  and 
bade  him  give  up  his  classical  studies  (Raumer,  Gesch.  d.  Piida- 
gogiJc,  I,  p.  16). 

1  The  student  should  read  Cassiodorus  in  order  to  get  an  idea 
of  the  narrow  range  of  the  information  regarding  the  N.  T. 
books  in  the  "Western  Church  after  the  sixth  century.  Yet,  such 
as  it  was,  it  gave  entire  satisfaction.     The  mind  rested  on  it. 


42        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM 


Immuta- 
bility. 


Ancient  dif- 
ferences of 
opinion  for- 
gotten. 


came  to  pass  that  the  idea  of  change  or  process  in 
connection  with  the  New  Testament  lay  outside  the 
range  of  ecclesiastical  opinion.  The  scholars  of  the 
ancient  Church  were  well  aware  that  there  had  been 
differences  of  opinion  concerning  the  canonical  stand- 
ing of  various  New  Testament  books.  The  familiar 
words  of  Eusebius  will  bring  this  clearly  to  mind. 
He  distinguished  between  the  books  of  an  unquestion- 
able standing  and  those  whose  standing  was  in  doubt. ^ 
He  knew,  as  Jerome  and  other  scholars  knew,  that  the 
Latin  and  Syrian  and  Alexandrian  churches  were  not 
of  one  mind  upon  some  important  points.^  And  the 
most  elementary  study  nowadays  brings  to  us  the 
knowledge  that  the  Christian  Bible  was  not  made  at  a 
stroke,  that  the  New  Testament  literature  did  not 
come  fully  level  with  the  Old  until  the  end  of  the 
second  century,  and  that  the  process  of  canonisation 
lasted  for  two  centuries. 

But  all  this  knowledge  lay  outside  the  ken  of  the 
Middle  Ages.  The  Canon  was  thought  of  as  a  deed 
of  God,  done  at  a  stroke.  The  human  authors  of  the 
New  Testament  books  were  out  of  sight  and  mind, 
and,  with  them,  all  sense  of  the  special  occasions  or 
the  particular  aims  of  individual  books.  The  thought 
of  change  or  process  either  within  the  New  Testament 
or  in  connection  with  it  was  wholly  foreign  to  the 
student  of  the  Bible.  The  Canon  of  the  Scripture 
stood  before  the  mind's  eye  as  a  divine  immutable 
total. 

The  mediaeval  Church  had  also  lost  the  scientific 


1  Eusebius,  Church  History,  III,  3,  25  (McGiffert's  Transla- 
tion and  Notes  in  the  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers,  1890). 
Until  the  sixteenth  century  these  facts  were  practically  sunk  in 
oblivion. 

2  Bleek,  Introd.  to  N.  T.,ll,  pp.  263, 269,  272  sq.  ;  Hilgenfeld, 
EinUitung  in  d.  N.  T.,  p.  123. 


HOW  CRITICISM  BECAME  NECESSARY       43 


apparatus  for  Bible-study.  The  ancient  Church  could 
show  a  noble  band  of  scholars,  some  of  them  great 
both  in  spirit  and  in  method.  Tlie  text-criticism  of 
Origen  and  Lucian,  the  Commentaries  of  Theodore 
and  Chrysostom,  the  historical  studies  of  Julius  Afri- 
canus,  the  labours  of  Jerome,  deserve  high  praise. 
These  men  had  direct  access  to  Scripture.  All  of 
them  knew  tlie  Greek.  The  Syrian  scholars,  and 
Jerome  as  well,  knew  the  Old  Testament  in  the  origi- 
nal. The  Bible-study  of  the  ancient  Church  was,  in 
large  measure,  direct  study.  It  used  the  original 
languages  of  Scripture.  It  stood  close  to  the  original 
sources  of  information. 

But  in  the  Middle  Ages  the  scientific  apparatus  for 
the  direct  study  of  Scripture  was  very  largely  lost. 
The  knowledge  of  the  Greek  kept  up  a  meagre  and  pre- 
carious existence.-'  Hebrew,  so  far  as  practical  use 
went,  was  lost  altogether.'^  The  Latin  text,  called  the 
Vulgate,  was  supreme.  What  with  ignorance,  and 
piety,  and  habit,  —  a  mighty  triumvirate,  —  men  did 
not  feel  called  to  go  behind  it.^ 

There  is  a  well-known  kind  of  sloth  that  gladly 
finds  an  asylum  in  religion.  So  subtly  do  the  noble 
and  base  elements  in  humanity  intermingle,  that  the 


Lack  of 

scientific 

apparatus. 


Direct 
knowledge 
of  Scripture 
not  possibla 


^  "  Gr(Bcum  est,  non  legitur,''''  nearly  covered  the  ground. 
The  greatest  thinker  of  the  Middle  Ages,  Thomas  Aquinas, 
knew  Greek,  but  his  knowledge  was  neither  full  nor  sure. 

2  Bede  knew  a  little  Hebrew  (Giles,  Bede's  Works,  1843,  I, 
p.  li).  But  like  Philo's  knowledge  of  the  meanings  of  Hebrew 
names,  it  was  just  enough  to  be  a  snare.  The  Council  of  Vienna 
(1312)  urged  the  establishment  of  chairs  of  Hebrew  at  Paris,  Ox- 
ford, Salamanca,  and  Bologna  (Geiger,  Joh.  Reuchlin,  p.  103). 
But  nothing  of  account  came  of  it. 

*  There  were  good  reasons  for  the  supremacy  of  the  Vulgate. 
The  devotions,  the  Canon  Law,  the  liturgical  usages  of  a  thou- 
sand years,  the  universal  value  of  Latin  as  the  language  of  edu- 
cated men,  worked  toward  this  end. 


relision. 


44        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

holiest  things  are  sometimes  made  the  cloak  and  coyer 
for  the  meanest.  Piety  often  stands  hard  by  mental 
laziness.  So  the  ignorance  and  inertia  of  the  period, 
using  the  noble  name  of  religion,  accumulated  upon 
the  sacred  text  a  great  mass  of  traditions,  coming 
indeed  from  various  sources,  yet  all  claiming  the 
highest  authority,  even  the  authority  of  Holy  Writ. 
Inertia  and  The  monks  of  Siuai,  in  course  of  time,  placed  within 
easy  walking  distance  of  their  monastery  all  the  sacred 
sites  associated  with  the  giving  of  the  Lavv.^  When 
scientific  curiosity  and  mental  stimulus  were  absent, 
it  was  inevitable  that  they  should  introduce  men  to 
sacred  things  along  the  line  of  least  resistance.  This 
illustrates  the  way  in  which  mediaeval  piety  frequently 
Avent  to  work  in  order  to  acquire  its  knowledge  of  the 
Sacred  Books. 

Even  when  Biblical  students  were  like  Bede,  strenu- 
ous and  eager,  the  lack  of  data  was  a  fatal  handicap. 
A  first-hand  knowledge  of  Scripture  was  impossible. 
This  condition  of  knowledge  concerning  the  Holy 
Land  is  a  good  example  of  the  prevailing  ignorance 
regarding  Biblical  realities.  Palestine  was  covered 
deep  with  a  thick  stratum  of  Western  traditions 
which,  in  a  majority  of  cases,  had  lost  all  connection 
with  the  traditions  of  the  country  as  well  as  with  the 
text  of  Scripture.  The  land  where  the  Sacred  Books 
grew  up,  although  under  the  feet  of  pilgrims  and 
monks,  ceased  to  be  a  witness  to  the  meanings  of  the 
Bible.     Foreign  opinion  and  foreign  ignorance  had  a 

1  Palmer,  The  Desert  of  the  Exodus,  I,  p.  8  :  "  All  the  most 
interesting  sites"  were  grouped  "  within  an  hour's  walk  of  the 
Convent  of  St.  Katherine."  Adam  Smith,  discussing  the  low 
state  of  learning  at  the  English  universities  in  his  time,  observes, 
"  It  is  the  interest  of  every  man  to  live  as  much  at  his  ease  as 
he  can"  (Wealth  of  Nations,  bk.  5,  ch.  1).  The  remark  has  a 
wide  bearing. 


HOW  CRITICISM  BECAME  NECESSAItY       45 


free  hand.  The  established  ecclesiastical  interpreta- 
tion of  Scripture  had  the  same  free  hand.  Antiquity 
was  indeed  reverenced  as  the  seat  and  source  of 
authority.  But  antiquity,  so  far  as  clear  knowledge 
went,  was  largely  an  empty  lield  open  to  preemption 
by  pious  fancy  or  dogmatic  interest.^ 

Furthermore,  the  ecclesiastical  Tradition  of  the 
West  had  a  peculiar  power.  Compared  with  it,  the 
Tradition  of  the  Eastern  Church  was  a  body  without 
a  head,  deficient  in  clear  self-consciousness  and  in 
capacity  for  self -direction.  The  idea  of  ecclesiastical 
infallibility  —  that  idea  without  which  Scriptural 
infallibility  could  not  be  successfully  applied  —  could 
not  attain  in  the  East  a  logical  evolution.  In  the 
"West  this  was  possible.  The  Papacy  provided  the 
organ  that  was  needed.  Now,  the  doctrine  of  Tra- 
dition presupposes  the  belief  that  the  Church  is  infal- 
lible. Just  in  proportion  as  this  belief  takes  itself 
seriously,  does  Tradition  become  masterful.  So, 
through  the  triumph  of  Rome,  Tradition  came  under 
the  control  of  a  hand  capable  of  directing  it  to  definite 
ends.  The  papal  authority  became  the  centre  of  the 
entire  body  of  traditional  interpretations  of  Scripture. 
The  Popes  held  the  power  of  the  keys.  They  could 
bind  and  loose.  It  was  for  them  to  determine  how  the 
Bible  should  be  understood.* 

What  was  the  mental  quality  of  the  Tradition  or 
interpretation  that  laid  its  hands  on  the  sacred  text 
with  an  authority  so  self-possessed  and  so  command- 

1  Reverence  for  antiquity,  if  not  chastened  by  the  scientific 
desire  for  knowledge  and  checked  by  a  large  and  lively  body  of 
facts,  always  acts  in  this  way.  For  an  illustration  close  at  hand 
see  Lodge's  discussion  of  the  stories  about  Washington's  boy- 
hood. Yet  America  is  the  least  likely  place  in  the  world  for 
legendary  growths. 

2  Luther's  address  to  the  German  nobility. 


Ecclesiasti- 
cal interpre- 
tation has 
its  own  way. 


Mental 
quality  of 
ecclesiasti- 
cal interpre- 
tation. 


46 


HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Little 
knowledge 
of  Greek 
and  Hebrew. 


ing?  We  have  seen  that,  in  early  centuries,  Tradi- 
tion was  the  sole  means  of  bridling  the  allegorical 
exegesis ;  that,  without  it,  the  New  Testament  would 
have  been  helpless  in  the  grasp  of  any  philosophical 
system  or  theosophic  view  that  happened  along.  For, 
since  the  grammatical  and  historical  method  of  inter- 
pretation had  not  been  reached,  the  Bible  was  not 
permitted  to  tell  its  story  in  its  own  tongue.  There- 
fore, just  as  the  Church  gave  us  our  Bible  by  insist- 
ing on  a  fixed  list  or  canon  of  Sacred  Books,  so  she 
preserved  for  us  our  spiritual  heritage  by  dogmati- 
cally ruling  out  the  multitudinous  Gnostical  inter- 
pretations which  would  have  shattered  her  unity  and 
unfitted  her  to  train  and  tutor  the  strong  but  bar- 
barous nations  of  the  West. 

The  Church  was  true  to  the  Bible.  Under  the 
conditions  of  the  time,  there  was  no  other  way  to 
appropriate  and  hand  down  God's  saving  Word  — 
the  revelation  of  the  human  unity  that  is  to  be  built 
up  on  the  divine.  But  in  the  course  of  a  thousand 
years  it  came  to  pass  that  the  dogmatic  tradition  of 
the  Western  Church,  thanks  to  deep  ignorance  on  the 
one  side  and  to  an  imperious  confidence  in  its  own 
finality  on  the  other,  imprisoned  the  sacred  text  which 
in  the  old  days  it  had  guarded.-^ 

Knowledge  of  the  original  languages  of  Scripture 
being  at  a  minimum,  the  main  body  of  information 
concerning  the  books  of  the  Scripture  —  their  authors, 
their  times,  and  places  —  having  sunk  into  forgetful- 

1  One  of  our  needs  is  a  thorough  study  of  the  Bullarium  as  a 
contribution  to  the  history  of  interpretation.  Nowhere  else  is 
it  made  so  plain  that  the  interpretation  of  the  Middle  Ages  was 
based,  not  on  the  nature  and  qualities  of  Holy  Writ,  but  upon 
the  will  of  a  vast  institution.  Rashdall  well  says  that  the 
mediaeval  mind  had  a  peculiar  genius  for  embodying  its  ideals 
in  institutions  (  Universities  of  Europe  in  the  Middle  Ages,  1895, 
I,  p.  6). 


now  CRITICISM  BECAME  NECESSARY       47 

ness,  it  was  easy  for  a  dogmatic  or  mystical  exegesis 
to  run  a  free  course.^  And  this  was  the  universal 
exegesis  of  the  Middle  Ages.^  Philology  had  not  yet 
come  to  create  in  Christian  scholars  a  sense  for  the 
solidity  of  the  laws  that  govern  language.  History 
had  not  yet  brought  in  a  con^manding  body  of  facts  to 
check  and  restrain  the  will  of  an  imperial  Church. 
In  one  way  or  another,  under  one  form  or  another, 
allegory  was  the  established,  the  authoritative  method 
of  interpretation.  The  dogmas  of  the  Church, 
received  upon  authority,  kept  chaos  from  breaking 
forth  upon  I^ible-study.  But  in  the  course  of  a  thou- 
sand years,  dogma  itself  travelled  far  from  the  oi'igi- 
nal  feeling  and  thought  of  Scripture.  The  historical 
meaning  of  God's  Word  was  grievously  obscured. 

The  Church  that  now  imposed  her  interpretation  Douma  of 
upon  God's  Word  headed  up  in  the  Papacy.     The  i."[;u!aS2 
dogma  of  infallibility  was  already  entering  the  last 
stage  of  its  liistory.    Looking  forward  from  the  tower- 
ing claims  of  the  great  mediaeval  Popes,  the  Vatican 
Council  of  1870  is  in  plain  view.^     The  belief  in  the 

1  Upon  the  relation  of  the  mystical  interpretation  to  the  dog- 
matic interpretation  and  the  relation  of  both  to  the  historical 
nature  of  Christianity,  see  Dorner,  Protestant  Theology,  1867, 
pp.  1-59. 

-  The  mediaeval  interpretation  of  the  N.  T.  was  superior  to 
the  interpretation  of  the  Old  (Rosenmiiller  says  this  of  Bede, 
Hist.  Inter]).  Lib.  Sac,  1795-1814,  vol.  5,  p.  92  sq.  It  might  be 
said  at  large) .  This  was  a  happy  accident.  In  an  age  that 
lacked  the  idea  of  evolution,  the  0.  T.  had  a  far  stronger  need 
of  the  allegorical  interpretation. 

8  The  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries  were  times  of  dog- 
matic relaxation.  The  rally  and  revival  of  medisevalism  in  the 
sixteenth  century  sketched  the  modern  conception  of  the  Papacy 
at  the  Council  of  Trent.  In  the  eighteenth  century  came  an- 
other period  of  relaxation.  But  the  religious  revival  of  the 
nineteenth  century  carried  the  Papacy  straight  on  to  the  Vati- 
can Council  of  1870. 


48        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


The  tem- 
poral power 
of  Papacy. 


The  Church 

monasti- 

cised. 


papal  supremacy  and  the  papal  infallibility  were  on 
the  verge  of  being  regarded  as  essential  to  salvation. 
And  the  Church  taught  that  all  this  could  be  found 
more  or  less  clearly  in  God's  Word. 

The  Church  that  read  her  own  mind  into  Scripture 
had  become  a  vast  political  establishment  claiming 
dominion  over  kings  and  peoples.  The  Pope  took  it 
upon  himself  to  crown  and  to  discrown  monarchs. 
He  laid  his  hands  on  Magna  Charta.  And  all  this 
under  the  guise  of  an  infallible  and  final  interpreta- 
tion of  texts  like  "  Thou  art  Peter "  and  "  Here  are 
two  swords." 

The  Church  that  claimed  the  power  of  the  keys,  the 
sole  and  exclusive  right  to  interpret  Holy  Scripture, 
had  become  an  out  and  out  monastic  Church.  And  if 
ecclesiastical  infallibility  is  to  be  effectively  used;  if 
it  is  to  be  anything  better  than  a  cloudy  abstraction 
wherein  the  mind,  pursued  by  difficulties,  hides  itself 
from  its  pursuers;  if  it  is  to  be  a  working  institution, 
this  must  always  be  the  ^course  of  things.  There 
must  be  a  body  of  men  who  shall  be  as  unlike  common 
human  society  as  it  is  possible  for  men  to  become 
while  remaining  upon  the  earth  and  existing  as  a 
society.  They  must  have  a  constitution  fundamen- 
tally unlike  the  constitution  of  laymen.  In  lay 
society  men  and  women  marry,  calling  upon  God  to 
help  them  cleanse  their  love  from  lust  that  they  may 
build  up  holy  families.  But  the  men  and  women  who 
constitute  the  inner  circles  of  the  infallible  Church 
cannot  marry.  In  lay  society  the  individual  holds 
property,  calling  on  God  to  help  him  use  his  money 
for  the  good  of  others.  But  the  men  who  constitute 
the  governing  body  within  the  infallible  Church  cannot 
have  any  property  of  their  own.  In  the  lay  world 
men  insist  upon  their  right  to  know  and  govern  them- 
selves, to  think  freely,  and  to  speak  freely.     Only  in 


now  CRITICISM  BECAME  NECESSARY       49 

time  of  war  do  they  subject  themselves  to  martial  law. 
But  at  the  heart  of  the  infallible  Church  a  different 
ideal  holds  sway.     The  control  of  the  Church  is  in  the 
hands  of  a  society,  like  the  Jesuits,  which  sets  up  the 
martial  law  of  absolute  obedience  as  the  type  of  law, 
and  in  which  the  individual  must  put  his  will  at  the 
feet  of  the  institution,  making  himself  will-less  like 
a  corpse.      And  all  this  had  to  be,   if  ecclesiastical 
infallibility  was  to  really  work.     The  right  to  govern 
and  to  think  in  the  Church,  the  right  to  claim,  in  the 
full  sense,  the  ideal  of  holiness,  must  be  vested  in  a 
vast,    undying  corporation,    in  a  close-knit  body  of 
priests,   whose  members  are  detached  from  the   lay 
world  by  the  vows  of  poverty,  and  chastity,  and  obedi- 
ence.    Moreover,  the  confirmation  of  all  this,  if  not 
the  authority  for  it,  must  be  found  in  Scripture.    For 
the   Church   all   along   was   loyal,    in    purpose    and 
motive,    to   God's   Word.      The   sovereignty  of   the 
Scriptures  was  practically,  if  not  theoretically,  taken 
for  granted.      Tradition  was  indeed  sacred,  and  the 
Bible  could  not  be  understood  apart  from  Tradition. 
But  the  sincere  and  devout  assumption  was  that  it 
interpreted  the  Bible  aright.^     So  it  was  necessary  to 
find   in   the   sacred   text   the   entire  conception  and 
scheme  of  the   monastic  and  infallible  Church.      A   A  large  body 
non-grammatical,    unhistorical    exegesis   carried  the   opin^on^" 
Pope  and  monastic  establishment  into  the  Scriptures,    imposed  on 
—  into  that  Old  Testament  which  is  the  book  of  Wit- 
ness to  the  inspired  thoughts  of  men  who  lived  out 
their  lives  witliin  the  bounds  of  a  nation's  experience, 
and  into  that  New  Testament  which  is  the  book  of 


^  The  history  of  the  doctrine  of  Tradition  in  its  relation  to 
Scripture  still  remains  to  be  written.  H.  J.  Holtzmann's  Kanon 
u.  Tradition,  1859,  is  a  strong  book,  but  almost  wholly  on  dog- 
matic lines. 

B 


60        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

a  Son  of  God  who  made  himself  like  unto  us  in  all 
things,  sin  only  except. 

Thus  the  mediaeval  Church  fell  into  deep  self- 
contradiction.  Her  main  desire  was  to  know  God's 
Word  truly.  Erigena  prayed  thus  with  himself,  "  0 
Lord  Jesus,  no  other  reward,  no  other  blessedness,  no 
other  joy  ask  I  of  thee  than  this  —  that  I  may  be  freed 
from  the  error  of  my  own  speculation  and  know  thy 
words  in  their  purity."^  All  the  saints  and  leaders 
of  the  medioeval  Church  prayed  so.  By  their  study 
and  thought  they  exalted  Holy  Scripture.  The  great 
Popes  stopped  the  mouths  of  their  adversaries  with  a 
text.  The  Canon  Law  rested  upon  the  Bible  as  an 
ultimate  authority.  Everything  of  high  degree  in  the 
Middle  Ages  joyously  paid  tribute  to  the  majesty  of 
the  Scriptures. 

Indeed,  as  one  century  followed  another,  the  spir- 
itual prestige  of  the  Bible  rose  higher  and  higher. 
The  longer  the  reign  of  Tradition  lasted,  the  more 
precious,  in  the  eyes  of  the  Church,  did  the  Scriptures 
become. 
Church  con-  But  the  doctrine  of  ecclesiastical  infallibility  shut 
o^n'idea.^'"  ^^®  Church  up  within  a  circle  from  which  she  could 
not  break  forth.  An  infallible  interpretation,  if  it 
means  anything  worth  speaking  of,  means  a  sufficient 
interpretation,  not  only  sufficient  for  the  needs  of  the 
contemporary  Church,  but  also  satisfactory  to  the 
sacred  text  itself.  Now  the  doctrine  of  infallibility — 
no  longer  loose-jointed  as  in  earlier  days,  but,  thanks 
to  the  Papacy,  compact  and  masterful  —  gave  large 
satisfaction  to  certain  governmental  and  devotional 
needs  of  the  Church.     It  did  not,  however,  and  it 

1  Hagenbach,  Dogmengeschichte^  5"=  Aufl.,  p.  354.  The  let- 
ters of  the  great  Popes,  Hildebrand  and  Innocent,  and  of  saints 
like  Bernard,  show  how  truly  this  noble  prayer  expressed  the 
deepest  desire  of  the  Middle  Ages. 


HOW  CRITICISM  BECAME  NECESSARY       61 

could  not  meet  the  demands  of  the  Bible  for  an  inter- 
pretation along  its  own  interior  lines.  On  the  one 
side,  a  human  interpretation  of  the  Word  was  installed 
as  its  keeper.  And  so  tlie  fortunes  of  the  Bible  were 
bound  up  with  the  fortunes  of  Tradition.  An  attack 
upon  Tradition  turned  into  an  attack  upon  God's 
Word.  On  the  other  side,  the  authoritative  interpre- 
tation was  not  open  to  searching  criticism. 

The  established  interpretation  of  Scripture  could,  The  Scrip- 
of  course,  be  changed.  Necessarily,  an  institution  so  aihnved  to 
vast  as  the  mediaeval  Church,  including  and  satisfy-   interpret 

t  iipmsf^lvGS 

ing  so  many  interests,  has  its  laws  of  development. 
But  the  changes  were  indirect  and  roundabout,  made 
under  cover  of  legal  fictions.^  The  very  changes,  so 
long  as  they  were  covered  by  the  fiction,  not  frankly 
recognised  as  the  correction  of  errors,  gave  a  longer 
lease  of  life  to  the  original  error,  the  doctrine  of  eccle- 
siastical infallibility.  As  a  result,  these  indirect  cor- 
rections of  false  interpretation  could  not  lead  the 
Church  toward  the  true  goal  of  Bible-study,  namely, 
the  insurance  of  the  right  of  Holy  Scripture  to  be 
interpreted  in  its  own  language  and  in  its  own  sense. 
Here,  then,  the  Church  fell  into  a  grievous  inter- 
nal conflict.  The  Bible  was  the  centre  and  heart  of 
the  Church's  collective  testimony  to  God's  view  of 
man's  life  and  His  own.  It  was  a  supreme,  if  not  the 
supreme,  object  of  faith.  As  such,  it  possessed,  in 
the  highest  degree,  the  right  of  all  great  objects  — 
the  right  to  be  understood.  And  the  Church  loyally 
conceded  the  right.     But  at  the  same  time,  by  her 

1  Upon  the  vast  part  played  by  legal  fiction  in  the  building 
and  maintenance  of  institutions,  see  Maine,  Ancient  Law,  ch.  2. 
There  is  a  large  element  of  legal  fiction  in  the  conception  of 
papal  infallibility.  The  discussions  concerning  the  notes  that 
distinguish  the  Pope  speaking  ex  cathedra,  horn  the  same  Tope 
speaking  on  a  lower  level,  prove  it. 


52 


EISTOEY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Thesupreme  efficient  governmental  application  of  infallibility,  she 
postponed  i^ade  it  impossible  to  put  the  ultimate  question  of 
Christianity  fairly  and  to  force  it  home.  What  is 
Revelation?  what  its  nature  and  method?  is  our  ulti- 
mate question.  The  appeal  to  the  Church's  infalli- 
bility merely  puts  the  question  off. 

No  great  question  can  be  settled  by  being  put  off. 
With  every  postponement  the  debt  to  reason  and  con- 
science grows  heavier.     Sooner  or  later,  the  debt  must 
be  paid,  and  paid  in  full.     The  Bible  could  not  be 
permanently  pent  up  within  Tradition.     Its  breaking 
forth  was  only  a  question  of  time.     To  be  true  to 
itself,  it  must  come  within  reach  of  the  lay  reason, 
and  into  direct  touch  with  the  conscience  of  the  lay 
world.     The  choice  before  the  Bible  lay  between  a 
splendid  isolation  and  imprisonment  within   Tradi- 
tion, on  the  one  side,  and,  on  the  other,  criticism  with 
Criticism        all  its  risks  and  dangers.     In  the  light  of  the  Bible's 
the^Serip-'^     own  nature  and  history,  but  one  choice  was  possible, 
tures.  The  Scriptures  must  choose  the  path  of  free  criticism, 

under  pain  of  not  being  known  as  they  are.^ 


1  The  grip  of  this  dilemma  cannot  be  loosened.  Were  the 
entire  Protestant  world  to  enter  the  Roman  communion  to- 
morrow, the  "Reformers  before  the  Reformation"  would 
straightway  begin  their  work  again,  and  Holy  Scripture  would 
insist  upon  bringing  Tradition  to  book. 


CHAPTER  IV 

HOW    THE    POSSIBILITY    OF    CRITICISM    WAS    GIVEN  ^ 

So  far,  the  history  of  criticism  runs  as  follows:  Summary. 
The  Scriptures  of  Israel  and  of  Apostolic  Christianity, 
by  their  own  intrinsic  merit,  were  able,  in  the  course 
of  the  second,  third,  and  fourth  centuries,  to  canonise 
themselves  in  the  mind  of  the  Catholic  Church,  thus 
becoming  the  Sacred  Books  of  Christendom.  While 
this  was  happening,  they  were  being  tied  up  with  tra- 
ditions and  doctrines  not  altogether  to  their  liking. 
In  the  following  centuries,  by  reason  of  the  hard  times, 
the  decay  of  lay  learning,  and  the  weakness  of  the 
State,  the  Church  was  led  to  take  her  own  infallibility 
with  deepening  seriousness  and  to  apply  it  with 
increasing  efficiency.  Tradition  set  itself  up  as  a 
sufficient  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures,  while  assum- 
ing a  grand  air  of  finality.  Through  the  development 
of  the  Papacy  and  the  resulting  centralisation  of 
Church  institutions.  Tradition  tightened  its  hold  on 
the  sacred  text.  Yet,  all  the  while,  by  isolating  the 
Scriptures,  by  keeping  them  remote  from  reason,  and 
treating  them  as  if  they  were  altogether  above  reason, 
the  Church  exalted  their  value  in  the  eyes  of  the  self- 
same laity  who  were  denied  the  right  to   interpret 

1  Literature  :  Rauke,  Hist,  of  Germany  in  the  Period  of  the 
liefonnation,  I  ;  Luther,  Primary  Works  (tr.  by  Wace  and 
Buchheim);  Moulton,  J7^■s^  of  the  English  Bible,  1878;  Schaff, 
Creeds  of  Christendom,  III ;  Dorner,  Hist,  of  Protestant  The- 
ology. 

63 


54 


HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


The  Bible 
must  he 
treated  as 
a  human 
book. 


them.  The  longer  tlie  isolation  and  prohibition  lasted, 
the  more  powerfully  did  the  Scriptures  strain  at 
the  cords  of  Tradition.  It  was  inevitable  that, 
sooner  or  later,  the  Bible  should  break  away  from  its 
keeper.^ 

And  now  we  are  to  see  how,  from  the  one  side,  the 
laity  pressed  in  to  touch  the  most  sacred  things  with 
their  own  hands,  while  from  the  other  the  Bible  went 
forth  to  meet  them.  Hereby  the  death  knell  of  the 
allegorical  exegesis  was  rung.  That  the  Bible  should 
be  interpreted  as  a  human  book  became  only  a  ques- 
tion of  time.  For,  taken  to  the  heart  of  the  laity  and 
lying  open  in  their  hands,  it  must  needs  be  studied 
as  the  lay  reason  studies  other  things  —  through  free 
questioning  and  through  scientific  investigation. 

So  long  as  the  interpretation  of  Holy  Scripture 
remained  in  the  hands  of  ecclesiastical  infallibility, 
Bible-study  could  not  be  thorough.  The  appeal  to 
the  authority  of  the  general  councils,  the  appeal  to  the 
Fathers,  the  appeal  to  the  Popes,  all  had  their  value. 

1  Marsilius  of  Padua  put  forth  (about  1324)  the  Defensor 
Pacis,  as  a  plea  for  the  Emperor  against  the  Pope.  With  great 
clearness  he  affirms  the  sovereignty  of  Scripture  (III,  2,  1). 
Christ  is  the  sole  judge  in  things  divine  (Christus  .  .  .  nullus 
alius,  TJ,  9).  Nothing  deserves  unconditional  belief  save  Holy 
Scripture,  and  the  interpretation  is  to  hecomnuini  concilio  fidel- 
ium.  (In  Melchior  Goldasti,  Monarchiae  S.  Romani  Imperii, 
1668,  II.)  A  study  of  the  other  political  treatises  contained  in 
the  three  volumes  demonstrates  that  the  theoretical  emphasis 
upon  the  rights  of  the  State,  growing  steadily  from  the  thir- 
teenth century  on,  worked  for  the  depreciation  of  Tradition  as 
a  clerical  monopoly,  and  for  the  exaltation  of  the  Scriptures. 
See,  also,  Wiclif,  Preface  to  De  Dom.  Div.,  and  Lechler,  Wic- 
lif,  I,  pp.  467-489.  While  the  political  life  of  the  Occident  was 
thus  loosening  the  connection  between  Scripture  and  Tradition 
in  one  way,  the  devotional  needs  of  Christendom  were  loosen- 
ing it  in  another  (Ullmann,  Reformers  before  the  Reformation, 
I,  pp.  8,  64  ;  II,  pp.  485,  488).       , 


POSSIBILITY  OF  CUITICISM 


55 


But   each  of  them  shut  up  the  mind  of  the  Church 
to  indirect  Bible-study.      Behind  all  these  stood  the 
Bible.     But  it  stood  behind  them,  and  could  not  be 
got  at  save  through  them.     Bible-study  was,  in  the  Ecclesiasti- 
main,  secondary.     The  Fathers  were  believed  to  con-   hn'ity  made 
stitute  a  harmonious  body  of  teaching,  so  that  when   Bible-study 
Abelard   suggested  the   contrary,    the  rulers  of   the  ^^^^^  ^'^^' 
Church   uttered  a  horrified   "Hush!"i     The   Papal 
Bulls  assumed  that  the  Bullarium  was  a  luminous 
exposition  of  Holy  Writ.     "When  Churchmen  spoke 
about  the  councils,  they  assumed  that  all  things  they 
counted  dear  could  be  found  within  the  scope  of  Vin- 
cent's "Believed  always,  everywhere,  and  by  every- 
body."    And   when  the   three   appeals   joined   their 
voices  in  unison,  they  made  it  practically  impossible 
for  the  Bible's  own  voice  to  be  heard,  save  in  so  far 
as  it  was  in  agreement  with  them. 

Boniface  the  Eighth,  under  the  stress  of  opposition  Boniface 
to  the  rising  power  of  the  French  monarchy,  carried  ^  ^^^" 
the  statements  of  the  Papacy,  if  not  its  claims,  higher 
than  any  of  his  predecessors.  Amongst  other  tower- 
ing Avords  of  his  are  these,  "The  Roman  Pontifex 
has  all  laws  within  his  breast."  ^  If  he  spoke  like  a 
madman,  then  his  madness  was  logical.  Sometimes  it 
takes  a  madman  to  draw  a  straight  conclusion  from  a 
simple  premise.  Men  in  their  senses  are  aware  of  the 
limitations  of  life,  of  the  need  of  moderate  statement, 
of  the  inevitableness  of  compromise.  A  man  of  great 
ability,  just  a  trifle  unbalanced,  is  more  fearlessly 
logical.  Boniface  was  thoroughly  logical.  If  the 
doctrine  of  papal  supremacy  is  to  be  seriously  taken, 

1  See  Bernard's  letters. 

2  "  Roiiianus  I'ontifex,  qui  jura  omnia  in  scrinio  pectoris  sui 
censetur  habere"  (In  Fr.  von  Schulte,  Gesch.  d.  Quellen  u. 
Literatur  d.  canon.  Bechts  von  Gratian  bis  auf  die  Gegenwart, 
11,  p.  34,  n.  3). 


56        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Tlie  Papacy 
the  ultimate 
iuteri)reter. 


he  was  well  within  his  rights.  And  in  asserting  that 
the  Pope's  breast  was  the  place  of  composition,  or 
record,  for  all  laws,  he  asserted,  in  effect,  that  the 
Popes  were  the  ultimate  interpreters  of  Scripture.  Of 
course,  neither  he  nor  any  other  Pope  ever  proposed 
to  dispense  with  the  counsel  and  consent  of  the 
Church  at  large.  But  in  him  the  life  and  authority 
of  the  Church  is  centred.  In  him  the  claim  of  Tra- 
dition to  be  a  sufficient  interpreter  of  Scripture  is 
embodied.  Only  through  the  Papacy,  and  tlirough 
the  opinion  of  the  Church  as  represented  in  the 
Papacy,  may  the  laity  hope  to  get  at  the  right  mean- 
ing of  the  Bible.  Now,  by  reason  of  the  vast  vested 
interests  of  the  most  imposing  institution  history 
has  ever  seen,  the  chances  of  the  papal  hierarchy 
changing  its  line  of  interpretation  were  exceedingly 
small. 

So  long,  then,  as  Bible-study  remained  under  the 
control  of  the  papal  hierarchy,  there  could  be  no  direct 
approach  to  the  Word  of  God.  The  authority  of  the 
Church  jealously  guarded  the  frontiers  of  all  sacred 
things.^  Inside  the  frontier  the  scientific  reason  had 
no  rights. 2     Questions  regarding  the  Bible  could  not 

1  A  sort  of  intellectual  concordat  was  agreed  upon,  more 
or  less  unconsciously  (Erdmann,  Hist,  of  Philosophy,  §  216  ; 
Ueberweg,  Hist,  of  Philosophy  (Ancient  and  Mediceval),  §§  102, 
104).  Rashdall  says  truly  concerning  the  great  university 
movement  of  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries,  that  the 
"intellectual  enthusiasm  "  of  Europe  began  to  flow  in  a  chan- 
nel separate  from  religious  enthusiasm  (  Universities,  I,  pp.  29, 
30).  But  thanks  to  the  concordat  whereby  reason  was  relegated 
to  a  sphere  of  its  own,  apart  from  the  field  of  theology  and 
sacred  things,  the  "humanities"  could  not  touch  the  text  of 
Scripture. 

2  Maywald,  Die  Lehre  von  der  Ziueifacher  Wahrheit,  1871. 
The  theory  of  a  twofold  truth  was  otficially  condemned.  For 
all  that,  it  was  deeply  related  to  the  mediaeval  view  of  things. 


POSSIBILITY  OF  CRITICISM  57 

get  over  tlie  ecclesiastical  guard  and  strike   home.    Biblical 
There  could  be  no  direct  Bible-study.^     Therefore,  a  couid'"ii"t 
breach  with  ecclesiastical  Tradition  was  necessary.    |>e  pushed 
God's  Word  must  go  forth  from  bondage  to  human 
opinion.     The  Bible  refuses  to  accept  the  Pope  as  its 
authoritative  interpreter.    It  insists  upon  interpreting 
itself. 

The  main  forces  of  European  life  in  the  sixteenth 
century  favoured  a  breach  between  the  Scriptures  and 
Tradition.  The  classic  age  of  Tradition,  from  500  a.d. 
to  1000,  was  a  period  of  contracting  life.  But  in  the 
Reformation  period  life  was  expanding  on  every  side. 
The  cry,  ''  Land !  Land !  "  from  the  masthead  of  Colum- 
bus's ship  foretold  a  new  age  of  commerce  and  travel, 
of  widening  adventure,  of  multiplying  human  inter- 
ests.''    *'  For  the  inhabitants  of  Europe,  the  fourteenth 

1  It  has  been  commonly  said  that  the  action  of  Trent  in  can- 
onising the  Vulgate  was  a  mortal  blow  to  sound  Bible-study. 
E.g.  Westcott,  Bible  in  the  Church,  p.  259.  This  is  overdone. 
No  institution  so  vast  as  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  ever  seri- 
ously troubles  itself  to  be  consistent.  It  is  no  single  conciliary 
action  that  affects  the  course  of  Bible-study  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  comnumion  ;  rather  is  it  the  whole  mental  attitude 
which  I'esults  from  taking  the  dogma  of  ecclesiastical  infalli- 
bility with  seriousness  and  applying  it  effectively.  The  dogma 
of  infallibility,  so  long  as  it  is  an  intellectual  plaything,  may  not 
permanently  retard  sound  Bible-study.  But,  vested  in  a  vast 
and  highly  organised  hierarchy,  it  renders  thorough  and  reso- 
lute criticism  impossible. 

-  The  travels  of  the  thirteenth  century  (Yule,  Marco  Polo; 
also,  Cathay  and  the  Way  Thither).  Expansion  of  geographi- 
cal knowledge  (Fiske,  Old  Virginia,  I,  pp.  41-43).  The  study 
and  theories  of  Roger  Bacon.  The  body  of  "  earth-knowledge" 
began  to  grow  rapidly.  Dowden's  Mind  and  Art  of  Shakespeare 
gives  a  brilliant  sketch  of  the  mental  consequences  in  the  six- 
teenth century  (the  Introduction).  Hakluyt's  Voyages,  read 
in  comparison  with  Butler's  Live.'i  of  the  Saints,  is  a  vivid  illus- 
tration of  the  new  motive  and  stimulus  of  life. 


58        BISTORT  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


The  expand- 
ing life  of  the 
sixteenth 
century. 


Travellers 
take  the 
place  of 
pilgrims. 


century  had  doubled  the  works  of  creation."*  New 
things  pressed  forward  to  claim  attention.  The 
sphere  of  intelligence  was  vastly  enlarged.  "Never 
has  a  discovery,  in  itself  purely  material,  produced, 
by  widening  the  horizon,  a  moral  change  more  extra- 
ordinary and  more  durable.-"  ^  Peter  Martyr,  writing 
in  1493,  said,  "  I  feel  myself  blessed  when  I  speak 
with  certain  sensible  men  from  the  number  of  those 
returning  from  that  province"  (Hispaniola).  His 
friend,  Pomponius  Laetus,  wept  for  joy  when  he  got 
the  news.*  That  letter  indicates  a  vital  change  in  the 
centre  of  mental  gravity.  The  pleasures  of  reason 
had  been  found,  for  many  centuries,  in  the  scholastic 
philosophy  and  in  the  study  of  the  Scriptures  under 
the  tuition  of  the  Fathers.  But  now  a  new  world  was 
coming  above  the  horizon.  And  a  thrill  of  joy  ran 
through  men  as  they  thought  of  the  unknown  things 
that  were  pressing  upon  knowledge. 

The  chief  end  of  the  pilgrims,  the  men  who  did 
the  disinterested  travelling  of  Europe  for  six  centu- 
ries, was  to  visit  the  traditional  holy  places  and  to  see 
as  large  a  number  of  the  bones  of  the  saints  as  pos- 
sible.* And  they  always  saw  what  they  went  to  see. 
They  did  not  seek  enlargement  of  knowledge,  and  they 
carried  home  a  minimum  acquaintance  with  new  facts. 
But  with  the  thirteenth  century  a  new  fashion  in  travel 
set  in.  And  after  the  fifteenth  century  the  men  who 
took  long  journeys,  for  objects  larger  than  gain,  went 
to  see  the  new  lands,  the  new  things.  The  desire  to 
enlarge  the  knowledge  of  Europe  led  them  on.  The 
age  of  Tradition  had  passed.  The  age  of  mental 
curiosity  had  come. 

1  Flumboldt,  Geographie  du  Nouveau  Continent,  1836, 1,  viii; 
also,  Cosmos  (ed.  Bohn),  II,  001. 

2  lb.,  ix.  3  7^^.^  pp.  4^  5, 

*  Beazeley,  The  Dawn  of  Modern  Geography,  1897,  ch.  2,  3,4. 


POSSIBILITY  OF  CRITICISM  59 

In  the  nineteenth  century  men  put  upon  Herschel's 
tomb  the  words,  "  He  broke  through  the  barriers  of 
the  heavens  and  added  a  universe  to  our  knowledge."^ 
This  is  the  signature  of  the  period  that  began  in  the 
fifteenth  century,  —  the  discovery  of  the  universe  ; 
boundless  expanses  of  potential  experience  encompass 
the  mind.  Such  an  age  is  necessarily  a  critical  age. 
For  criticism  is  not  an  extraordinary  form  of  mental 
action.  The  critical  reason  of  our  time  is  identical, 
in  its  main  qualities,  with  the  scholastic  reason  of 
the  Middle  Ages.  The  reason  is  one  and  the  same. 
It  is  the  circumstances  that  differ.  In  the  earlier 
period,  the  knowledge  of  facts  was  nearly  at  a  stand- 
still. The  increments  of  knowledge  came  almost 
wholly  from  commenting  on  text-books  and  from  the 
masterly  use  of  the  power  of  mental  abstraction.^ 
New  facts  did  not  mass  themselves  on  the  frontiers 
of  the  traditional  conceptions.  That,  however,  is 
what  continually  happens  in  our  own  period.  And 
the  result  is  criticism.  Using  terms  broadly,  we 
may  say  that  the  controlling  thought  of  our  time  is 
critical. 

The  explanation  is,  that  vast  bodies  of  new  facts  New  facts 
have  risen  behind  the  old  hypotheses  and  interpreta-   throld^°° 
tions,  assailing  them  in  the  rear.     In  a  time  of  rapidly  hypotheses, 
expanding  knowledge,  the  certainty  that  truth,  unex- 
plored, yet  real,  stretches  out  on  all  sides  of  the  mind, 
causes   a   shadow   of   suspicion   to    fall   upon   every 

1  Perrupit  claustra,  Humboldt,  Cosmos,  I,  p.  71. 

2  Whewell,  Hist,  of  the  Inductive  Sciences,  3d  ed.,  1875,  Bk. 
IV,  ch.  2  ("The  Commentatorial  Spirit").  The  mind  was 
content  with  "  collections  of  opinions,"  ib.,  II,  p.  187.  A  simi- 
lar disposition  prevailed  in  Bible-study.  The  commentaries 
were  for  the  most  part  eaten?©,  collections  of  patristic  opinions. 
This  tendency  began  as  early  as  Jerome  (Harnack,  Altchrist. 
Lit.,  L.).  Direct  study,  observation,  was  not  the  order  of  the 
day. 


60        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

hypothesis.  Reason  as  a  whole  becomes  critical,  con- 
stantly challenging  the  old  definitions  in  the  interest 
of  material  which  they  did  not  include,  steadily  press- 
ing forward  through  the  old  conceptions  to  unmeasured 
realities  that  lie  behind  them.  Criticism  is  the  mental 
climate  of  such  a  period. 

In  the  sixteenth  century  the  influence  of  the  State 
was  rapidly  rising.  Two  hundred  years  before, 
Philip  of  France  said  to  Boniface,  "Holy  Mother 
Church,  the  Bride  of  Christ,  is  made  up  not  only  of 
clergy,  but  of  laity."  ^  Since  then  the  credit  of  the 
secular  power  had  steadily  increased.  A  hundred 
years  later  a  great  cardinal,  Richelieu,  allied  himself 
with  Protestants  in  order  to  exalt  France.  The  prin- 
Principie  of  ciple  of  nationality  shattered  mediaeval  unity.  It  had 
nationality.    ^^^^  ^.gg^j^  g^g^  ^j^  literature;  for  in  the  fifteenth  and 

sixteenth  centuries,  the  culture  of  Europe  throwing 
off  the  common  forms  that  made  mediaeval  literatures, 
wherever  written,  so  strikingly  alike,  commenced  to 
nationalise  itself.^  The  records  of  the  printing-press 
show  a  steady  decline  in  the  number  of  books  written 
in  Latin,  a  corresponding  increase  in  the  number  of 
those  written  in  the  modern  languages.^ 

The  unity  of  the  Canon  Law  was  broken,  its  domain 
curtailed.  In  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries 
it  had  succeeded  in  completely  emancipating  itself 
from  the  civil  law,  and  had  established  an  exclusive 
control  over  all  matters  relating  to  marriages  and 
wills.'*    But  the  civil  and  the  common  law,  strength- 

1  Gieseler,  Ecclesiastical  History,  Philadelphia,  1836,  II, 
p.  238. 

2  Brunetifere,  Hist.  d.  I.  Lit.  Franraise,  1898,  Livre  2,  ch.  2. 
8  Paulsen,  Geschichte  d.  (jelehrten  Unterrichts,  1885,  Beilagel. 

The  records  of  the  press  in  other  countries  would  no  doubt  give 
results  similar  to  those  in  Germany. 
*  Schulte,  Canon  Ii(cht,  II,  pp.  25-28. 


POSSIBILITY  OF  CRITICISM  61 

ening  with  the  use  of  the  secular  power,  kept  gaining 
ground  until  the  sixteenth  century,  and  then  its  vic- 
tory was  assured.  As  in  literature,  so  in  law,  the  AKeofim- 
period  of  national  development  had  opened.  The  gone Vy."^'' 
age  of  imperial  unity  in  spiritual  things  was  over. 
The  prestige  of  Tradition  had  received  a  mortal 
wound. 

The  age  of  criticism,  as  we  know  it,  did  not  come 
straightway.  But  the  promise  of  criticism  was  given 
when  once  the  break  between  the  Bible  and  Tradition 
had  been  made.  For  Tradition  and  criticism  are 
diverse  forms  of  Biblical  interpretation.  Tradition 
is  the  interpretation  that  sets  up  the  opinions  about 
the  Scriptures  held  by  the  papal  hierarchy  as  sufficient 
and  authoritative.  Criticism  is  the  interpetation  that 
insists  upon  going  behind  the  interpretation,  to  put  Fall  of  Tra- 
direct  questions  to  the  Sacred  Books.  As  soon,  then,  eriUcism^'^^ 
as  the  prineijjle  of  Tradition  fell  into  discredit,  the  inevitable, 
critical  principle  was  conceived.  Centuries  might 
pass  before  it  came  clearly  to  the  light.  None  the 
less,  the  moment  the  Bible  began  to  shake  off  the  hold 
of  Tradition,  criticism,  as  a  new  form  of  the  Church's 
mental  obligation,  had  won  its  footing. 

The  obligation  of  criticism  is  composed  of  two  ele- 
ments, the  element  of  conscience  and  the  element  of 
reason.  Men  are  so  made  that,  in  the  long  run,  only 
the  best  is  good  in  their  eyes.  If  the  Bible  is  the 
best  thing  the  Church  owns,  then  it  is  an  act  of  con- 
science to  bring  the  Bible  forth  from  behind  Tradition 
into  direct  and  quickening  touch  with  the  common  life 
of  men.  Again,  if  conscience  insists  upon  a  first-hand 
knowledge  of  God's  Word  for  the  sake  of  the  man  who 
needs  to  be  saved,  reason  insists  upon  the  same  thing 
for  the  sake  of  the  object  to  be  known.  "For  to  every 
object,  great  and  small,  the  scientific  mind  guarantees 
the  right  to  be  seen  as  it  is. 


62 


HISTORY   OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Reformation 
an  act  of 
conscieuce. 


Christ  and 
the  Scrip- 
tures. 


The  act  of  conscience  made  the  Reformation.' 
That  is  not  saying  that  the  forces  wliich  made  the 
Ee formation  possible  were  altogether  pure  and  spir- 
itual. No  great  historical  movement  will  stand  the 
test  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  When  the  Children 
of  Israel  went  up  out  of  Egypt,  a  mixed  multitude 
went  with  them.  So,  when  the  desire  for  the  pure 
Word  of  God  carried  the  Bible  outside  the  bounds  of 
ecclesiastical  Tradition,  a  mixed  multitude  of  desires 
and  motives  went  along.  For  all  that,  the  main 
reason  for  the  movement  was  the  longing  of  men  to 
see  the  oracles  of  God  in  their  original  meanings.^ 

Conscience  is  the  pledge  and  guarantee  of  our  right 
to  tlie  best.  Now  the  fortunes  of  Christianity  as  a 
historical  religion  are  wrapped  up  with  the  fortunes 
of  Christ's  book.  It  is  true,  of  course,  that  our  Lord 
is  not  imprisoned  within  his  book.  He  is  the  living 
Head  of  a  living  Church,  and  touches  men  through 
the  sacraments,  the  ministry,  and  the  manifold  mani- 
festations of  his  real  presence.  Yet  it  is  no  less  true 
that  Christianity  without  the  Bible  would  be  a  religion 
adrift  upon  the  tide  of  human  feeling.  Christ's  book 
is  God's  record  of  the  true  process  of  revelation.  It 
is,  therefore,  the  abiding  standard  whereby  we  shall 
test  the  spirit  that  seeks  to  rule  the  Church  in  God's 
name,  so  that  we  may  learn  whether  it  is  God's  Spirit 
or  only  the  spirit  of  a  period  or  a  time.  The  Bible, 
so  far  as  human  thought  can  go,  is  God's  best  thing. 
It  is  the  thing  that  Christians  most  deeply  need  to 
know. 

So  it  was  an  act  of  conscience  to  appeal  to  the  Bible 


1  Schenkel,  Das  Wesen  d.  Protestantismus,  1862,  §§  12-30. 
"The  Roman  Catholic  depotentiation  of  the  Bible." 

2  The  connection  between  the  political  and  the  religious  ele- 
ments is  admirably  wrought  out  by  Raake,  Hist,  of  Germany 
in  Period  of  Reformation,  I. 


POSSIBILITY  OF  CRITICISM 


63 


as  the  Reformers  did.     Papal  Tradition  interposed  First-hand 

itself  between  the  religious  consciousness  and  Scrip-   ,j"s^ripture 

ture,  asserting  that  the  papal  interpretation  was  the   demauded. 

true  and  sufficient  one,   and  that  whosoever  sought 

entry  into  the  Scriptures  by  any  other  way  was  a  thief 

and  a  robber.     But  this  position  no  longer  satisfied 

the  mature  religious  sense  of  Christendom.    Tlie  Bible 

is   God's  best  thing  for  our   thought.     It   must   be 

known  as  it  is  in  itself.     And  since  Tradition  refused 

to  permit  men  to  go  behind  it,  in  order  to  compare  it 

with  the  Word  of  God,  there  was  nothing  to  be  done 

but  discard  Tradition  altogether,  in  order  to  achieve 

a  direct  study  of  the  Scriptures. 

At  the  cry,  "Tlie  Bible  and  the  Bible  alone  the 
religion  of  Protestants,"^  confusion  broke  in  upon 
Bible-study.  The  immediate  result  was  that  indi- 
vidual infallibility  threatened  to  take  the  place  of 
ecclesiastical  infallibility.  A  chaos  of  conflicting 
interpretations  followed.  Historical  interpretation 
was  very  slow  in  coming.  Even  Erasmus,  lover  of 
Greek  and  ardent  believer  in  the  human  aspects  of  slowly 
the  New  Testament,  could  contend  for  the  manifold 
sense  of  Scripture.  Colet,  arguing  against  him,  "  set 
down  "  the  manifold  meanings  found  in  the  texts  "  not 
to  the  fecundity  of  the  Scriptures,  but  to  the  sterility 
of  men's  minds  and  their  incapacity  of  getting  at  the 
pure  and  simple  truth.  If  they  could  but  reach  that, 
they  would  as  completely  agree  as  now  they  differ."''^ 
This  is  the  ground  taken  by  the  exegesis  of  our  time, 
and,  what  is  more,  it  is  successfully  defended  against 


Historical 
interpreta- 
tion came 


1  William  Chillingworth,  Religion  of  Protestants,  1635.  He 
contended  for  the  rational  interpretation  of  Scripture.  The 
clergyman  who  read  the  burial  service  over  Chilliugworth's 
body  threw  the  book  into  his  grave,  crying,  "  Go,  rot  with  thine 
author." 

2  In  Seebohm,  The  Oxford  Reformers  (3d  ed.),  p.  124. 


64 


HI  STOUT   OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Individual 
infallibility 
a  poor  sub- 
stitute for 
papal  infal- 
libility. 


Luther's 
words  to  the 
German 
nobility. 


the  assaults  of  ecclesiastical  and  dogmatic  interests. 
But  it  was  ground  far  in  advance  of  the  capacities  of 
the  age.  Other  reformers  approved  of  Colet's  posi- 
tion.^ Even  three  or  four  swallows,  however,  do  not 
make  a  summer.  Tradition  had  held  the  allegorical 
interpretation  with  bit  and  bridle.  Tradition  having 
lost  control,  and  the  grammatical-historical  interpreta- 
tion being  still  in  the  future,  the  text  continued  to 
lie  at  the  mercy  of  the  interpreter.  The  difference 
Avas  that  the  Pope  by  the  Tiber  had  given  place  to  the 
pope  in  the  individual  Christian's  breast. 

Moreover,  Chillingworth's  position  entailed  an 
unnatural  and  morbid  relationship  between  the  idea 
of  the  Church  and  the  idea  of  the  Bible.  Eightly 
understood,  these  two  ideas  must  live  together,  if  they 
would  live  nobly.  But  the  Reformation  was  neces- 
sary. The  supreme  need  of  conscience  was  a  true 
understanding  of  Scripture.  And  this  could  not  be 
hoped  for,  so  long  as  ecclesiastical  opinion  claimed 
infallibility.  No  matter,  then,  whether  chaos  broke 
loose  or  not,  the  Bible  must  be  set  up,  for  the  time 
being,  as  if  it  were  a  thing  in  itself,  apart  from  the 
Church's  life. 

The  genius  of  Christianity  required  that  the  book 
of  Life  should  be  opened  and  that  the  issues  of  Church 
government  should  be  fearlessly  examined.  Luther 
wrote  to  the  German  nobility,  *'Hath  not  the  Pope 
erred  ?  .  .  .  freshly  would  we  judge  everything  ac- 
cording to  Scripture."^  No  longer  should  the  Bible 
be  studied  at  second  hand.  The  Fathers,  looked  up 
to  by  the  Middle  Ages  as  authoritative  interpreters, 
were  driven  out  of  their  place.  "For  articles  of  faith 
may  not  be  drawn  from  the  words  and  deeds  of  the 


1  Luther  and  Calvin  (Farrar,  Interpretation,  pp.  327,  346). 

2  Primary  Works  (Wace  and  Buckheim). 


POSSIBILITY  OF  CniTICISM 


65 


Fathers.  .  .  .  Our  creed  is  that  the  Word  of  God 
alone  can  ground  articles  of  faith,  no  one  else,  not 
even  an  angel," ' 

"It  is  not  true,"  said  Petrus  Verruilius,  "that  the 
Scriptures   take   their   authority   from    the   Church. 
Their  certitude  is  derived  from  God  and  not  from 
men.     The  Word  came  before  the  Church.    It  is  from 
the  Word  that  the  Church  holds  its  vocation."  ^    This 
was  a  thoroughly  representative  saying.    The  Reform- 
ers conceived  the  Church  as  existing  to  interpret  the 
Scriptures  truly  and  to  bring  God's  saving  Word  close 
to  the  consciences  of  men.     And  if  the  Church  fails  to 
do  this,  she  misses  her  vocation.    But  if  the  authority  The  Church 
of  the  Church  must  freshly  verify  itself  by  the  inter-   |^e"|gi7,'y  ^ 
pretation  of  the  Scriptures,  her  authority  ceases  to  be   the  study  of 
for  the  laity  an  ultimate  thing,  and  becomes  a  medium  ^'-'"P'^^'e- 
through  which  the  layman  is  brought  into  touch  with 
the  ultimate.     Then,  in  the  last  analysis,  it  is  not  the 
authority  of  the  Church  that  verifies  Scripture,  but  it 
is  Scripture  that  verifies  itself.     The  Bible  is  set  up 
as  its  own  interpreter. 

While,  therefore,  at  first,  the  cashiering  of  Tradi- 
tion might  appear  to  throw  interpretation  into  confu- 
sion by  making  each  individual,  however  ignorant,  a 
master  of  interpretation,  it  was  only  in  appearance. 
In  reality,  to  set  up  the  Bible  as  its  own  interpreter 
meant,  in  the  long  run,  that  Scripture  must  be  gram- 
matically and  historically  interpreted.  For,  on  the 
one  side,  to  throw  down  the  bulwark  of  Tradition, 
and  invite  the  common  feeling  of  Christians  to  test 
God's  Word  by  direct  study,  presupposes  an  entire 
confidence  in  the  ability  of  the  Bible  to  take  care  of 
itself.     The  Bible  is  its  own  keeper.     The  Scriptures 

1  Smal.  Art.  To  .same  effect  the  various  Protestant  confes- 
sions.    See  Schaff,  Creeds  of  Christeinlom. 

2  In  Reuss,  Hist,  of  the  Canon,  p.  29(5. 


66        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

do  not  fear  what  men  may  do  unto  them.  So  Bible- 
study  should  be  fearless  and  free.  On  the  other  side, 
the  Scriptures,  having  once  asserted  the  power  of  self- 
interpretation,  having  cast  off  the  guardianship  of 
Tradition,  must  be  studied  until  they  are  known  in 
their  original  sense.  And  this  necessity  was  sure,  in 
course  of  time,  to  usher  in  the  grammatical  and 
historical  interpretation. 

So  the  Sacred  Books  of  Christendom  were  to  build 
up   for   themselves   a   defence    against    chaotic   and 
unworthy  renderings.     Taken  in  their  own  mind  and 
meaning,   they   can  have,   as  Colet  affirmed,   only  a 
The  single      single  sense.      This    single   sense  is   the   safeguard 
sense.  against  exegetical  abuse  —  a  far  better  defence  than 

Tradition  could  provide.  For  Tradition  gained  uni- 
formity of  interpretation  by  imposing  the  allegorical 
system  upon  Scripture,  along  with  the  proviso  that 
allegory  must  keep  within  the  bounds  marked  out  by 
authority.  But  the  tiger  does  not  change  his  spots 
when  he  is  put  within  a  cage.  The  allegorical  prin- 
ciple, whether  rioting  with  the  Gnostics  or  forced  by 
the  mediseval  Church  to  keep  the  peace,  could  have 
but  one  upshot.  The  Scriptures  could  not  be  clearly 
known  in  their  own  sense.  The  best,  then,  that  Tra- 
dition could  do  was  to  limit  the  scope  of  allegorical 
exegesis.  But  the  Reformation  principle,  consistently 
applied,  overcame  it  altogether. 
The  rights  When  the  Bible  came  forth  from  behind  Tradition, 

of  the  laity.  [^  sought  translation  into  the  people's  tongue.  The 
Eeformation,  being  an  act  of  conscience,  required  that 
the  supreme  law  of  the  Church  should  be  published 
in  the  language  of  the  laity.  Just  as  the  publication  of 
the  Twelve  Tables  at  Rome,  in  the  fifth  century  B.C., 
indicated  that  the  law  of  Rome  was  to  be  no  longer 
the  monopoly  of  the  patricians,  so  did  the  widespread 
enthusiasm  for  translations  of  the  Bible  indicate  that 


POSSIBILITY  OF  CRITICISM  67 

the  interpretation  of  Scripture  was  to  be  no  longer  a 
monopoly  of  the  priesthood.^ 

This  accords  well  witli  the  nature  of  Revelation. 
Our  Sacred  Books  were  written  by  men  of  the  people. 
They  were  written  for  the  people.  The  Bible,  by 
abolishing  all  distinction  between  religious  truth  as  it 
is  for  the  multitude,  and  the  same  truth  as  it  is  for 
the  religious  specialist,  makes  of  itself  the  most  demo- 
cratic book  in  the  world.  It  was  not  possible,  then, 
for  the  Scriptures  to  be  deeply  taken  in  their  own 
sense  so  long  as  a  monasticised  priesthood  held  the 
power  of  the  keys.  Written  as  the}'  were  in  the  broad  The  Bible 
day  of  history,  enshrining  as  they  do  the  divine  ideals  ^  the  com- 
for  humanity  at  large,  they  must  be  carried  back  into  "^ou  life. 
the  midst  of  the  common  life  through  which  their 
inspiration  came,  in  order  to  be  truly  interpreted. 
So  the  assertion,  by  means  of  translation  into  the  ver- 
nacular, of  the  laity's  right  to  a  first-hand  knowledge 
of  the  Bible  was,  in  effect,  an  assertion  of  the  Bible's 
right  to  be  understood. 

The  religious  motive  at  work  in  the  movement  of 
the  sixteenth  century  effected  a  breach  between  Bible- 
study  and  Tradition.  It  did  this  because  the  essence 
of  religion  is  the  desire  to  be  saved;  that  is,  the 
desire  to  be  in  close  and  cleansing  touch  with  the  ulti- 
mate realities  of  life.  The  Bible,  as  God's  book  of 
Witness  to  the  fundamental  qualities  and  final  issues 
of  life,  required  to  be  known  at  first-hand,  if  men 
were  to  be  truly  saved.  So  conscience  cashiered 
Tradition.  At  the  same  time,  the  downfall  of  Tra- 
dition, of  the  sacerdotal  monopoly  of  interpretation, 
threw  the  doors  of  Bible-reading  and  Bible-study  wide  The  BiWe- 
open  to  the  laity.  While  the  breach  with  Tradition  {{j^^iaitv 
involved  the  direct  study  of  Scripture,  the  incoming 


1  Moultou,  Hist,  of  the  Eiujlish  Bible,  pp.  21,  22. 


The  reli- 
gious motive 
of  Bible- 
study  not 
sufficient. 


68        HISTOBT  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

of  the  laity  involved  free  study.  For  the  lay  mind  of 
Europe  must  needs  move  with  the  lay  will ;  and  the 
lay  will,  building  up  the  modern  State,  could  not  stop 
short  of  orderly  freedom,  political  and  mental.^  When 
Christianity  established  itself  in  the  Eoman  Empire, 
the  Bible  became  the  Vade-mecum,  the  book  of  devo- 
tion, for  Europe.  When,  in  the  sixteenth  century, 
Tradition's  claim  to  be  an  authoritative  interpretation 
was  rejected,  the  Bible  entered  into  the  expanding  life 
of  the  Occident.  Henceforth  it  must  take  its  chances 
in  a  climate  of  free  action  and  free  thought. '^ 

Thus,  through  the  religious  motive,  the*  first  great 
step  was  taken  in  the  direction  of  criticism.  The 
original  thought  and  feeling  of  Scripture  must  be  dis- 
covered and  appropriated.  Once  started  upon  this 
road,  where  could  Bible-study  bring  up,  short  of  the 
historical  interpretation? 

But  the  religious  motive,  by  itself,  would  not  have 
been  equal  to  the  work  of  discovering  and  shaping 
these  new  principles  of  interpretation  which  the  nature 
of  revelation  called  for.  The  Bible,  in  its  essence,  is 
a  history,  a  body  of  facts ;  its  saving  thought  is  intel- 
ligible only  in  connection  with  those  facts.  As  a  his- 
tory, and,  what  is  more,  a  history  moving  over  a 
very  broad  field  of  time,  it  needs  to  be  studied  in  the 
light  of  history  at  large.  Now,  work  of  that  sort  is 
the  function  of  reason.  For  reason  exists  to  see 
things  as  they  are.  As  Bacon  finely  said,  it  "doth 
buckle  and  bow  the  mind  unto  the  nature  of  things." 


1  Eanke  calls  the  Reformation  period  one  of  the  "greatest 
conjunctions"  of  luiiversal  history,  I,  p.  243. 

2  This  stands  out  very  clearly  in  the  history  of  England  and 
America.  The  Bible  has  been  knit  up  into  the  life  of  free  peo- 
ples. The  free  mental  action  that  accompanies  free  life  must 
touch  the  Bible  to  the  quick.  The  Bible  must  submit  to  the 
most  searching  examination  or  cease  to  be  our  national  book. 


POSSIBILITY  OF  CRITICISM 


69 


The  religious  motives  of  the  Reformation,  the  splen- 
did protest  of  conscience  against  vicars  and  substi- 
tutes for  realities,  laid  upon  the  Church  the  obligation 
to  return  to  the  tirst  sources  of  our  religion.  Reason 
alone,  liowever,  — scientific  curiosity,  multiplying  the 
materials  of  knowledge  and  shaping  its  methods,  — 
could  create  the  apparatus  of  historical  Bible-study. 

In  the  thirteenth  century,  the  mediaeval  Church 
had  made  a  concordat  with  reason.  The  field  of  expe- 
rience was  divided.  There  were  to  be  two  bodies  of 
truth,  and  they  were  not  to  harass  each  other.  On 
the  frontier  between  them  stood  the  infallible  authority 
and  Tradition  of  the  Cliurch.  Behind  Tradition  the 
Scriptures  lay  secure,  beyond  the  reach  of  such  ques- 
tions as  an  impassioned  love  of  truth  alwa3's  forces 
home.  Raymond  of  Sabonde,  in  his  Natural  Theology 
published  about  1436,  put  the  point  perfectly  when  he 
said  that  there  are  two  books,  the  book  of  Xature  and 
the  book  of  Scripture;  and  that  the  former  is  open  to 
everybody,  while  the  latter  is  only  open  to  the  priest- 
hood.^ So  reason  could  not  get  at  the  sacred  text 
save  through  authority.  That  meant  that  reason, 
when  it  crossed  the  frontier  between  the  study  of 
Nature  and  the  study  of  Scripture,  surrendered  its 
sword.     The  Bible  was  secure. 

Tlie  security  was  dearly  bought.  We  must  again 
remind  ourselves  that  an  authority  of  the  mediaeval 
sort  could  not  be  efficiently  worked,  unless  by  a  mon- 
asticised  Church  headed  up  in  a  Pope.  So  the  Bible, 
fleeing  from  reason  to  find  asylum  in  authority,  must 
be  content  when  the  deepest  elements  in  its  own  nature 
are  suppressed  or  kept  in  the  background.  The  heart 
of  Scripture  is  its  view  of  the  creative,  saving  unity 
of  the  divine  life  as  revealed  through  a  human  expe- 


The  concor- 
dat of  the 
thirteenth 
century. 


Price  paid 
by  Scrip- 
ture for 
insurance 
against 
questions. 


Hagenbach,  Dogmenffesch.,  §  159. 


70        HISTOEY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Growing 
self-confi- 
dence of 
reason. 


rience  worked  out  under  historical  conditions.  If  the 
Bible,  then,  in  order  to  be  unvexed  by  reason,  takes 
the  veil  and  becomes  the  text-book  of  a  monasticised 
Church,  it  allows  its  own  fundamental  qualities  to  be 
overshadowed. 

The  Bible  would  not  pay  the  price.  If,  as  the  book 
of  Witness  to  God's  best  things,  it  demanded  a  direct 
touch  on  the  lay  conscience,  as  a  book  of  history  it 
demanded,  with  equal  insistence,  a  direct  touch  on 
the  lay  reason. 

In  the  movement  called  the  Eenaissance,  the  reason 
of  Europe  began  to  claim  again  the  right  of  suffrage 
in  things  spiritual.  It  had  gone  into  bankruptcy  in 
the  fifth  century,  when  the  State  broke  down.  For 
many  centuries  thereafter,  all  the  truth  that  seemed 
vital  to  man  passed  into  the  keeping  of  men  living  the 
monastic  life  and  separated,  as  far  as  possible,  from 
the  conditions  under  which  the  layman  lives  and 
within  which  his  reason  works.  But  the  principle 
of  the  Kenaissance  was  the  exaltation  of  lay  learning, 
—  the  learning  of  the  Greeks  and  the  Eomans.  To  be 
sure,  the  Latin  classics  had  been  read  all  through  the 
Middle  Ages.  Not,  however,  in  and  for  themselves. 
Kather  as  forerunners  of  Christianity.  The  Renais- 
sance made  them  an  end  in  themselves.  The  differ- 
ence is  profound.^  In  the  one  case  they  were  treated 
as  if  they  stood  within  the  mediaeval  view  of  life.  In 
the  other  case,  they  called  the  mind  away  from  that 
view.  This  involved  a  revolution  in  the  aims  and 
methods  of  education.  The  medieval  universities 
were,  in  the  main,  clerical  establishments.^  The 
teaching  staff  was  made  up  almost  wholly  of  men  in 

iBrunetifere,  Lit.  Fran^.,  pp.  41,  42. 

2  Rashdall,  Universities ;  Denifle,  Entstehung  d.  Universitd- 
ten  des  3Iittel(clters,  1885.  The  words  of  the  text  need  to  be 
qualified,  but  they  are  substantially  sound. 


POSSIBILITY   OF  CIIJTICISM 


71 


orders  or  men  under  the  monastic  vows.  They  were 
within  the  sphere  and  under  the  discipline  of  the 
Papacy.  Vital  truth,  all  the  truth  that  touched  the 
heart  and  quickened  the  imagination,  was  controlled 
by  Tradition.  But  the  llenaissance  brought  the  mind 
of  the  Occident  to  a  sharp  turn  in  the  road.  It 
brought  to  light  new  principles  of  education.  It  con- 
tained the  promise  of  a  new  type  of  university.  It 
exalted  lay  learning.  It  involved  the  emancipation 
of  reason  from  authority. 

Ultimately,  Tradition  must  justify  itself  before 
reason,  even  as  the  Reformation  forced  it  to  justify 
itself  before  conscience.  Hooker,  the  great  English- 
man, wrote,  "  Although  ten  thousand  general  councils 
would  set  down  one  and  the  same  definitive  sentence 
concerning  any  point  of  religion  whatsoever,  yet  one 
demonstrative  reason  alleged  or  one  manifest  testimony 
cited  from  the  mouth  of  God  himself  to  the  contrary, 
could  not  clioose  but  overweigh  them  all."  ^  In  words 
like  these  the  relationship  between  the  two  elements 
in  the  sixteenth-century  movement  comes  out.  The 
desire  to  know  and  the  desire  to  be  saved  must  work 
together  in  order  to  settle  the  accounts  between  Reve- 
lation and  Tradition.  The  Bible  freely  puts  itself 
within  the  reach  of  reason. 

The  Reformation  and  the  Renaissance  created  a 
resistless  demand  for  the  original  text  of  the  Scrip- 
ture. The  mediaeval  Church,  fixing  the  lines  of  her 
character  in  the  counter-Reformation,  blundered  into 
an  undue  valuation  of  the  Vulgate.  But  Protestant- 
ism went  straight  to  the  Greek  and  the  Hebrew.  And 
the  free  study  of  the  times  travelled  the  same  road. 
How  closely  the  needs  of  awakening  reason  and  the 
needs  of  the  quickened  conscience  kept  together  may 


Revolution 
iu  education. 


Tradition 
and  reason. 


Demand  for 
the  original 
texts. 


Hooker,  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  II,  5,  7. 


72        HISTORY  OF  THE  IIIGEER   CRITICISM 

be  seen  in  the  work  of  llenclilin,  Avho  published  the 
first  Hebrew  grammar,  in  1506,^  and  of  Erasmus,  who 
put  out  the  first  Greek  Testament,  in  1516.  Eras- 
mus urged  the  need  of  improved  texts  of  the  Fathers. 
Eeuchlin  proclaimed  the  necessity  of  the  original  text 
of  Aristotle.  Men  had  outgrown  the  secondary  sources 
of  knowledge  that  satisfied  the  Middle  Ages.^ 

With  well-nigh  incredible  heat  men  laid  hold  of 
the  rudiments  of  Greek  and  Hebrew.  The  study  of 
grammar  became  a  matter  of  prime  importance.  In 
effect  this  meant  the  downfall  of  the  allegorical 
method  of  interpretation  which  had  reigned,  without 
a  break,  since  the  second  century.  The  simple,  his- 
torical sense  of  Scripture  became,  in  principle,  the 
final  and  decisive  sense.  And  therewith  the  human 
authors  of  our  Sacred  Books  were  restored  to  honour. 
Eor  allegory,  when  it  exalted  the  mystical  and  theo- 
logical meanings  of  Scripture  far  above  the  historical, 
by  one  and  the  self-same  mental  act,  so  conceived  the 
divine  that  in  its  presence  the  human  lost  colour  and 
individuality. 

Protestantism  was  inconsistent.     The  principles  of 

1  Eeuchlin  was  fully  self-conscious  regarding  the  signifi- 
cance of  his  work.  "  Exegi  monumentum  aere  perennius,"  he 
wrote. 

2  The  entire  scholarly  movement  of  the  sixteenth  century 
was  toward  the  direct  study  of  the  ancients.  It  constituted  a 
veritable  revolution  of  reason.  One  might  find  a  good  illustra- 
tion of  the  "critical"  bias,  the  bent  toward  direct  study  of 
antiquity,  in  the  history  of  Egyptology.  The  first  feeble  attacks 
upon  the  hieroglyphs  were  made  between  1529  and  1589.  Kept 
up  through  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries,  it  was  not 
until  1799  that  the  Kosetta  stone  was  found,  which  a  few  years 
later  gave  to  ChampoUion  the  entree  into  Egyptian  antiquity. 
Ed.  Meyer,  Gesch.  d.  alten  Aegyptens,  1887  ;  Einleitung,  pp. 
282-313.  The  dates  synchronise  with  the  course  of  the  Higher 
Criticism  closely  enough  to  be  instructive, 


POSSIBILITY  OF  CRITICISM  73 

the    Reformation   were    not    followed    home.      The   Protestant- 

1      •        •      1     •    r  1T1  -Ti  J.1  ism  not 

doctrine   of   ecclesiastical    intallibility   was    thrown  consistent. 

overboard.  But  the  cognate  doctrine  of  Scriptural 
infallibility  was  retained  and  even  exaggerated.  In 
the  Middle  Ages  the  two  doctrines  grew  together. 
The  idea  of  the  Bible  and  the  idea  of  the  Church  were 
practically  identified.  In  the  sixteenth  century  the 
two  ideas  parted  company.  The  Roman  wing  of 
Christianity  proceeded  to  force  and  strain  the  idea  of 
the  Church.  The  Protestant  wing,  for  a  time,  forced 
and  strained  the  idea  of  inspiration.  It  even  came 
to  pass,  in  the  seventeenth  century,  that  the  Roman 
Catholic  scholars  held  far  more  liberal  views  of  in- 
spiration than  the  Protestants.^ 

As  a  temporary  thing  this  inconsistency  might  be 
pardoned.  Under  the  circumstances  it  was  entirely 
natural.  The  case  is  parallel  to  the  prodigious 
emphasis  that  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries 
put  upon  the  divine  right  of  kings.  In  those  days 
the  Monarchy  was  the  Protestant  bulwark  against  the 
Papacy.  It  was  well-nigh  inevitable  that  political 
theory  should  make  much  of  the  divine  right  of 
kings. ^  Even  so,  the  infallibility  of  the  Bible  was 
set  up  as  a  bulwark  against  the  infallibility  of  the 
Church.  Naturally  the  theory  of  literal  inspiration 
was  strained  to  the  uttermost.^  Natural  as  it  was, 
however,  it  was  none  the  less  a  dire  inconsistency. 
The  Protestant  principle  brought  forward  the  human 
authors  of  Scripture  and  insured  their  standing  with 
the  Divine  Autlior.  The  Protestant  practice  drove 
them  out  of  His  presence.     So  the  Reformation  went 

1  Hagenbach,  Docjmengeschichte,  §  243. 

2  Maine,  Ancient  Law  (3d  Am.  ed.),  p.  334. 

8  The  claim  of  inspiration  even  for  the  Hebrew  vowel-points 
shows  how  the  theory  was  strained  until  it  snapped  (Diestel, 
§39). 


74        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


The  promise 
of  historical 
interpreta- 
tiou  given. 


Bible- 
reading. 


limping  and  halting.  The  sacred  text  still  lay  at  the 
mercy  of  allegory.^ 

In  spite,  however,  of  backsets  and  hindrances,  the 
pledge  and  assurance  of  a  human,  historical  interpre- 
tation of  Scripture  had  been  given.  Once  given,  it 
could  not  be  recalled.  A  mighty  clerical  establish- 
ment like  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  can  put  off  for 
an  indefinite  period  the  frank  and  full  discussion  of 
the  ultimate  question  touching  the  nature  and  scope 
of  revelation.  But  the  Protestant  churches  could  not 
long  postpone  it.  Once  and  for  all  they  had  rejected 
the  sacerdotal  monopoly  of  interpretation.  Once  and 
for  all  the  Bible  had  gone  forth  into  the  open  field  of 
free  life  and  thought.  After  the  third  century  the 
forum  publicum  of  the  Church,  the  body  of  men  who 
put  questions  and  gave  answers  about  sacred  things, 
was  made  up  mainly,  at  times  almost  wholly,  of  the 
clergy.  The  laity  now  pressed  in  to  claim  a  place  on 
the  jury. - 

The  Bible  became  the  people's  Bible,  and  Bible- 
reading  a  widespread  habit.  ^  The  habit  had  no  great 
spread  in  tiie  ancient  Church.     In  the  latter  Middle 


1  Thus  Tradition  successfully  reasserted  itself  as  a  sufficient 
and  practically  final  interpretation  of  the  sacred  text  (Griind- 
berg,  Spener,  1892,  pp.  23,  24). 

2  Speaking  broadly,  there  are  four  periods  in  the  history  of 
the  forum  puhlicum  for  theological,  that  is  to  say,  primary 
questions.  (1)  In  the  conciliar  action  of  the  Nicene  period,  the 
laity  have  no  direct  part,  save  in  so  far  as  they  were  represented 
by  the  Emperor.  (2)  The  bishops  get  complete  control  of  the 
clergy.  This  carries  the  primary  question  farther  away  from 
the  laity.  (3)  The  Pope  conquers  the  episcopate.  This  takes 
the  primary  question  still  farther  away  from  the  judgments  and 
criticisms  of  the  lay  world.  (4)  The  rise  of  the  laity  since  the 
sixteenth  century. 

8  "  Bibel-Lesung "  in  Rprilencyclopddie  (S"  Auf.)  ;  Reuss, 
Hist,  of  the  M.  T.,  §§  424,  458,  469,  465,  468,  500. 


POSSIBILITY  OF  CRITICISM  75 

Ages,  it  gained  ground.  That  is  proved  by  the  atti- 
tude of  the  hierarchy  in  and  after  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury. In  the  fifteenth  century,  popular  appreciation 
of  the  Bible  grew  strong.  That  is  shown  by  the  con- 
siderable number  of  translations.  Just  at  this  time 
the  printing-press  came  to  the  help  of  God's  Word. 
We  have  here  a  very  striking  illustration  of  the  way 
in  which  the  spiritual  and  the  mechanical  elements  of 
history  work  together.  In  the  patristic  period  a  man 
could  not  carry  about  with  him  the  entire  Bible.  The 
shape  and  bulk  of  books  in  those  days  rendered  it 
impossible.  But  the  form  of  the  modern  Bible  had 
been  reached  before  the  printing-press  came  into  use. 
Thus,  when  the  hour  struck  for  the  passing  of  the 
Scripture  out  of  the  control  of  the  clergy,  the  mechani- 
cal agencies  of  civilisation  were  on  hand  to  do  their 
full  part.^ 

The  laity  began  to  be  Bible-students.''  The  story  story  of 
of  Bradford,  the  first  governor  of  Plymouth  Colony,  ^^^adford. 
is  a  vivid  proof  that  the  change  brought  about  by  the 
Reformation  was  a  mighty  one.  In  his  old  age,  this 
heroic  Pilgrim,  who  had  done  a  man's  full  work  in 
the  rough  New  World,  took  up  the  study  of  Hebrew. 
He  desired  "to  see  with  his  own  eyes  the  ancient 
oracles  of  God  in  all  their  pristine  beauty."  What  a 
change  since  the  days  of  Jerome!  A  layman,  a 
pioneer,  his  hands  hardened  by  the  sword  and  rough- 
ened by  the  axe,  studying  Hebrew  in  his  old  age !  A 
revolutionary  departure  this  from  the  state  of  things 
prevailing  in  the  Middle  Ages.  Then  no  man  might 
see  the  Scriptures  save  through  the  medium  of  the 

1  Stevens  well  says  that  "the  secular  history  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  is  the  sacred  history  of  printing"  (Bible  in  the 
Caxton  Exhibition,  1877,  p.  25). 

2  Cassiodorus  in  the  sixth  century  was  a  Bible-student  after 
a  fashion.    But  he  went  to  the  monastery  to  get  his  Bible-class. 


76        BISTOBY  OF  THE  niGHER   CRITICISM 

Fathers.  But  now  the  Bible  is  its  own  interpreter. 
And  it  is  face  to  face  with  the  layman's  world,  the 
new  world  of  the  spirit.  No  longer  can  there  be  two 
bodies  of  truth  that  come  not  near  each  other.  All 
truth  must  be  vitally  related.  Once  and  for  all  the 
Bible  abandons  the  cloisters  of  mediseval  Tradition, 
where  security  is  paid  for  by  misinterpretation.  Once 
and  for  all  the  Scriptures  pass  out  into  the  world 
where  philosophy  and  science  claim  a  divine  right  to 
be,  and  where  the  layman,  looking  into  his  heart, 
speaks  his  mind  freely. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE   CRITICAL    PRINCIPLE    WINS    ITS    FOOTING* 

It  was  in  the  eighteenth  century  that  criticism  The  eigh- 
became  an  historical  force.  The  mental  conditions  of  ^*  ^y 
the  time  differed  profouudly  from  those  of  the  early 
Middle  Ages.  If  the  latter  was  the  classic  age  of 
Tradition,  then  the  eighteenth  century  was  the  classic 
age  of  scepticism  touching  Tradition.  The  typical 
reasoner  in  the  first  case  was  a  man  who  looked  at  the 
Scriptures  through  the  interpretation  of  the  Fathers, 
and  who  looked  at  the  universe  througli  such  frag- 
ments of  ancient  knowledge  as  had  come  down  to  him. 
Authority  was  the  first  word  of  the  mediaeval  man. 
It  was  also  his  last.  For  when,  in  the  fourteenth  cen- 
tury, Occam  gave  up  Anselm's  attempt  to  make  Tra- 
dition seem  rational,  he  did  not,  for  that  reason,  give 
up  faith.  Things  might  be  true  in  theology  that 
were  false  in  philosophy,  and  contrariwise.  For  all 
tliat,  the  devout  son  of  the  Church  held  fast  his  belief 
and  bowed  to  the  authority  of  the  Church. 

The  typical  man  of  the  eighteenth  century  threw 

1  Literature  :  Paulsen,  German  Universities,  tr.  1895,  Ge- 
schichte  d.  gelehrten  Unterrichts,  1885;  Lecky,  Hist,  of  national- 
ism; Hettner,  Literaturgeschichte  d.  achtzehnten  Jahrhunderts, 
1872;  Morley,  Voltaire,  Jiousseaii,  Diderot;  Leslie  Stephen, 
English  Thought  in  the  Eighteenth  Century.  The  justification 
and  necessity  of  these  general  references  is  found  in  the  fact 
that  the  eighteenth  century  is  the  decisive  turn  of  our  history. 
To  understand  its  mental  character  is  a  fundamental  need. 

77 


78 


HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Character- 
istics. 


Individual- 
ism. 


Tradition  upon  the  dust-heap.  He  cared  nothing  for 
the  Fathers.  He  did  not  care  much  for  books.  Des- 
cartes' scorn  of  book-learning  was  representative. 
His  resolve  to  know  his  own  mind  thoroughly  was 
prophetic.^  Bacon,  however  he  might  differ  from  Des- 
cartes in  matters  of  method,  was  not  a  whit  more 
modern  than  he.  The  two  together  were  the  heralds 
of  the  new  age  of  mental  life.  All  intellectual 
"idols,"  all  the  notions  that  came  down  out  of  the 
past,  with  the  mark  of  Aristotle  and  the  schoolmen 
on  them,  were  to  be  turned  out  of  doors.  No  tra- 
ditions, scholastic  or  ecclesiastical,  shall  thrust  them- 
selves between  reason  and  reality 
shall  be  first-hand. 

The  eighteenth-century  man  fully  possessed  him- 
self. He  cried  down  the  ancients  and  cried  up  the 
moderns.^  No  kind  of  experience,  though  ever  so 
true  in  its  time  and  place,  could  set  itself  up  as  a 
classic.  He  built  upon  his  own  reason  and  intuitions. 
In  the  strongest  sense  he  was  an  individual.  The 
mediaeval  man  had  lived  and  thought  as  a  member  of 
a  corporation,  or  a  class,  or  a  Church ;  he  had  a  deep, 
naive  faith  in  all  the  traditiens,  whether  sacred  or 
secular.^     But  the  eighteenth-century  man  thought 


All  knowledge 


1  Contrast  with  the  "  commentatorial  method  "  of  the  Middle 
Ages.  Descartes'  Treatise  on  Method  was,  to  use  a  much- 
abused  phrase,  epoch-making  (Huxley's  essay  on  Descartes  in 
Lay  Sermons). 

2  Bacon's  adage,  "  Antiquitas  saeculi  juventus  mundi,"  indi- 
cated antiquity's  loss  of  prestige.  Eigault,  Le  querelle  des 
anciens  et  des  modernes,  18.56  ;  Flint,  Philosophy  of  History 
("France"),  1894,  pp.  212-215. 

^  If  the  student  should  glance  at  Thomas  Stanley's  Hist,  of 
Philosophy  (1st  ed.,  London,  1655),  and  contrast  it  with  any 
modern  history  of  philosophy,  he  would  quickly  see  that  the 
faith  of  the  mediaeval  and  early  modern  world  in  ancient  tradi- 
tions was  sweeping.     It  was  quite  as  childlike  in  dealing  with 


CRITICAL   PRINCIPLE   WINS   ITS  FOOTING      79 

for  himself, — or  thought  that  he  did;  and  that,  for 
our  purpose,  amounts  to  the  same  thing.  He  shook 
off  not  one  kind  of  tradition,  but  all  kinds.  Hume 
declared  that  the  first  page  of  Thucydides  was  the 
commencement  of  real  history.^  Schleiermacher, 
when  a  mere  boy  in  his  twelfth  year,  was  tortured  by 
the  suspicion  that  all  the  ancient  records,  both  sacred 
and  profane,  might  turn  out  to  be  forgeries."  His- 
toric doubt  was  widespread. 

So  it  came  to  pass  that  the  word  "  antiquity,"  which, 
for  so  many  centuries,  had  been  a  word  of  inspiration, 
even  a  word  to  conjure  with,  now  became  a  word  that 
called  up  a  problem.  Ceasing  to  be  an  authority, 
reverenced  and  exploited,  it  turned  into  a  body  of 
facts,  or  possibilities  of  fact,  which  must  be  studied 
and  explored. 

It  were  easy  to  dwell  on  the  negative  side  of  the 
historic  doubt  of  the  eighteenth  century.  It  were 
equally  easy  to  dwell  on  the  medieval  saint's  indiffer- 
ence to  personal  cleanliness.  But  every  great  tendency 
must  be  estimated  by  the  flower  it  puts  forth,  not  by 
the  muck  in  which  it  grows.  The  mood  of  mediaeval 
sainthood  put  forth  the  Gothic  cathedral  and  the  Imi- 
tation. And  the  eighteenth  century  put  forth  the  his- 
torical spirit  of  the  nineteenth.  Historic  doubt  made 
Niebuhr  possible." 

the  traditions  regarding  the  Greek  philosophers  as  in  its  deal- 
ing with  the  legends  of  the  Apostles.  It  was  a  tmiversal  bias 
(Chwolson,  Die  Smbier,  1856,  I,  pp.  3,  4). 

1  Essay  on  the  Pop^^lousness  of  Ancient  Nations.  Life  and 
Letters  of  Niehuhr  (tr.  by  Winkworth),  II,  p.  433. 

"^  Life  {iv.  by  Rowan),  I,  p.  4.  "My  twelfth  year  ...  I 
conceived  the  idea  that  all  the  ancient  authors,  and  with  them 
the  whole  of  ancient  history,  were  supposititious."  Cf.  Des- 
cartes' resolution  to  begin  his  mental  life  by  doubting  everything. 

3  It  is  something  better  than  a  mere  coincidence  that  the  2d 
edition  of  De  Beaufort's  Diss,  sur  V incertitude  des  cinq  pre-' 


Power  of 
the  new 
learuing. 


80        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

For  the  prime  mental  quality  of  the  eighteenth 
centniy  man  was  not  his  doubts  and  negations.  They 
were  on  the  surface.  Below  them  was  a  deep,  strong 
sense  of  outlying  fact,  of  truth  waiting  to  be  known, 
of  a  new  world  of  undiscovered,  but  discoverable 
things.  In  this  field  the  story  of  Anquetil  du  Perron 
is  as  representative  and  as  refreshing  as  the  story  of 
Bayard  is  in  a  very  different  field. ^  He  was  born  in 
1731.  Studying  in  Paris  he  acquainted  himself  with 
Hebrew,  Arabic,  and  Persian.  He  happened  upon  a 
fragment  of  the  Zend-Avesta  in  the  Royal  Library  at 
Paris.  It  kindled  in  him  the  desire  to  see  India,  and 
to  learn  the  Zend  and  the  Sanscrit  languages.  To 
that  end,  he  enlisted  as  a  common  soldier,  that  he 
might  be  sent  to  India,  and  there  find  an  opening  into 
those  regions  of  knowledge  whither  no  European  had 
penetrated.  His  life  is  typical  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury in  its  promise  and  potency.  The  consciousness 
f  facts  standing  outside  all  existing  knowledge  and 
casting  suspicion  u.pon  the  established  framework  of 
knowledge,  was  its  chief  characteristic. 

It  was   in  this  century  that   criticism  was   born. 


miers  siecles  de  Vhistoire  romaine  appeared  in  1750,  nearly 
synchronous  with  the  beginning  of  Semler's  Bible-work.  This 
reference  is  taken  from  Puchta,  Institutionen  (6"^  Auf.,  1865), 
I,  p.  101,  n.  Flint,  Phil,  of  H.,  pp.  253-261.  Beaufort's  ZJ/sser- 
tation  suggests  Niebuhr,  although  widely  different  in  spirit ;  it 
indicates  the  fact  that  the  mind  of  Western  Europe  had  entered 
a  "critical" climate.  The  first  parts  of  Niebuhr's  Roman  His- 
tory issued  in  1811-1812.  If  the  term  "epoch-making"  had 
not  been  rendered  useless  by  overuse,  we  should  call  it  "  epoch- 
making  "  in  the  fullest  sense.  See  Stanley's  Life  of  Arnold  for 
the  profound  impression  it  made. 

1  Translation  of  the  Avesta,  1771  ;  Legislation  Orientale, 
1778.  One  catches  from  his  work  the  same  thrill  of  discovery 
and  mental  enlargement  that  we  feel  in  the  letters  of  Columbus. 
Alfred  Cave,  Introduction  to  Tlieology  (2d  ed.),  p.  209. 


CRITICAL   PRINCIPLE   WINS  ITS  FOOTING      81 


born. 


From  the  conditions  and  causes  that  gave  it  birth  we  Criticism 
may  draw  a  definition  of  its  essential  nature.  The 
main  condition  was  the  bankruptcy  of  Tradition,  leav- 
ing the  mind  free  to  know  and  possess  itself.  The 
main  cause  was  the  sense  of  outlying  facts.  So  we 
define  criticism  as  a  movement  of  the  human  mind, 
inspired  by  the  consciousness  of  truth  unknown,  but 
kuowable,  and  sustained  by  the  resolution  to  serve 
the  trutli  without  fear  or  favour.  This  definition  is 
indeed  a  general  one,  having  no  specific  reference  to 
I>ible-study.  All  the  better.  It  will  serve  to  remind 
us  that  the  critical  period  of  Bible-study  is  part  and 
parcel  of  the  general  mental  movement  of  Europe. 

The  eighteenth-century  man  was  a  Deist.  In  the 
place  of  ecclesiastical  infallibility  he  put  his  own 
infallibility.  Even  if  he  was  too  well-bred  to  speak 
like  Tom  Paine,  calling  theology  a  mischievous  inven- 
tion of  priests  and  proclaiming  his  own  mind  to  be  his 
Church,  yet,  in  effect,  he  constituted  a  Church  of  one : 
his  religion  found  its  sole  authority  in  his  reason. 
Moreover,  he  spoke  with  authority  on  theological 
questions.  His  dogmas  were  indeed  few  and  portable. 
Yet,  such  as  they  were,  he  took  them  with  great  seri- 
ousness. His  confidence  in  the  rightfulness  and 
conclusiveness  of  his  own  theological  processes  was 
absolute.^ 

Furthermore,  —  and  this   is   the   most    significant 


Deism. 


point,  —  in   a  great   majority  of   cases,   the  leading 
Deists  were  laymen.^     They  inaugurated  a  lay  move- 


The  lay 
movement 
in  theology. 


1  Sidney  Lee,  Autobiography  of  Edward,  Lord  Herbert  of 
Cherhnnj,  1880.  Herbert  of  Cherbury,  in  contrast  with  Bay- 
ard and  with  the  Puritans.     He  marks  the  arrival  of  a  new  type. 

"^  England  was  the  birthplace  of  Deism,  because  it  was  the 
home  of  the  self-£:overning  layman.  It  is  interestinc;  to  note 
that  the  first  English  Deist  was  a  Member  of  Parliament.  See 
speech  of  a  "Gentleman  from  Gray's  luu  '  (1530)  in  Rhys 


82        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

ment  in  theology.  The  bearings  of  this  fact  upon  the 
history  of  criticism  are  easily  found.  If  we  are  care- 
ful to  distinguish  between  that  mental  attitude  which 
is  the  spring  and  source  of  criticism  and  that  body  of 
opinions  touching  special  points  and  special  questions 
with  which  it  is  often  confused,  we  shall  define  Bibli- 
cal criticism  as  the  applications  of  scientific  methods 
to  the  textual  and  literary  study  of  our  Scriptures. 
Now,  the  soul  of  science  is  its  disposition  toward  facts 
as  a  whole.  And  this  disposition  or  mental  tempera- 
ment is  a  result  of  a  union  between  two  elements. 
The  first  is  the  desire  to  know  facts  just  as  they  are, 
without  regard  to  the  vested  interests  of  society. 
The  second  is  the  sense  of  outlying  fact,  of  things 
unknown  invading  the  frontiers  of  knowledge,  the 
sense,  too,  of  unexplored  and  undiscovered  meanings 
in  those  things  with  which,  so  far  as  appearances  go, 
the  mind  may  long  have  been  intimate. 
Philosophy.  Both  the  desire  to  know  and  the  sense  of  outlying 
fact  are  parts  of  the  lay  movements  of  reason.  Of 
course,  that  is  a  somewhat  rough  and  ready  statement. 
But,  taking  history  broadly,  it  is  sufficiently  exact  to 
satisfy  practical  requirements.  The  history  of  phi- 
losophy proves  this.  The  Greeks  founded  philosophy. 
And  their  philosophy  was  part  and  parcel  of  a  rich 
development  of  lay  life;  that  is,  of  human  life  as  it 
unfolds  itself  along  the  secular  lines  of  trade  and 
travel  and  widening  experience,  of  systematised 
observation,  of  art  and  politics.  When  Greek  phi- 
losophy finished  its  course,  theology  succeeded  it  as 

Davids,  Hibbert  Lectures,  1882,  pp.  5,  6.  The  gentleman  from 
Gray's  Inn  brings  forward  the  discontent  of  "  laiques  and  secu- 
lar persons"  and  seeks  the  "catholic  and  common  notions" 
which  Herbert  of  Cherbury  knew  he  had  found.  See  also 
Leslie  Stephen,  English  Thoright,  and  Hettner,  LiteraturgC' 
achichte  d.  uchtzehnten  Jahr.,  I, 


ClilTICAL  PRINCIPLE   WINS  ITS  FOOTING      83 

the  highest  form  of  tliought.  Such,  in  trutli,  it  by 
nature  is,  and  such,  in  the  h)ng  run,  it  will  show  itself 
to  be.  But  the  theology  that  dominated  the  Occident 
from  the  beginning  of  the  second  century  to  the  four- 
teenth, was  a  theology  produced  almost  wholly  by 
men  in  orders.  In  the  Middle  Ages,  it  was  well- 
nigh  exclusively  the  aifair  of  men  who  had  taken  the 
monastic  vows.  Philosophy,  the  tradition  of  lay 
thought  and  learning,  never  lost  its  continuity. 
Straight  down  through  the  darkest  ages  it  maintained 
its  dignity  as  an  intellectual  tradition.  But  for  a 
long  time  it  was  a  bare  tradition.  And  even  after  the 
great  intellectual  revival  of  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth 
centuries,  philosophy  was  not  truly  philosophic.  For 
the  essence  of  philosophy  is  the  freedom  of  its  look 
at  the  universe.  It  matters  not  whether  the  philoso- 
pher be  a  layman  or  a  man  in  orders.  But  it  matters 
a  great  deal,  everything  in  fact,  whether  a  layman 
shall  have  the  self-confidence  to  philosophise,  and  to 
philosophise  with  no  man  to  make  him  afraid. 

Moreover,  philosophy  contradicts  its  own  nature,  if  Authority 
it  stops  short  at  some  boundary  marked  out  by 
authority  and  bows  its  head  to  listen  to  the  words, 
"  Thus  far  and  no  farther !  "  The  spirit  of  philosophy 
is  a  free  look  at  things  and  a  free  look  at  all  things. 
To  permit  authority  to  shut  it  up  to  a  contemplation 
of  "secular"  things,  or  to  put  it  off  with  a  merely 
preliminary  view  of  "  sacred  "  things,  while  the  real 
body  of  "  sacred  "  things  is  reserved  for  the  study  and 
contemplation  of  a  clerical  hierarchy,  were  to  deny 
itself.^  That  is  precisely  what  mediaeval  philosophy 
did  when  it  made  a  concordat  or  compromise  with 
Tradition  in  the  thirteenth  century. 

1  Ueberweg,  Hist,  of  Philosophy  (Ancient  and  Mediceval), 
pp.  355-357,  443. 


84 


HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Laymen 
competent 
to  speak  on 
the  myste- 
ries. 


What  13 
criticism  ? 


In  truth,  mediseval  philosopliy  was  not  philosophy 
at  all,  since  philosophy  can  recognise  no  authority 
save  the  inherent  laws  of  human  nature  and  mind,  and 
since  those  laAvs  can  only  authenticate  themselves  as 
laws  by  opening  themselves  to  a  free  and  fearless 
examination.  Besides,  if  mediaeval  philosophy  gain- 
said the  nature  of  philosophy,  mediaeval  theology 
no  less  gainsaid  the  nature  of  true  theology.  For 
theology,  if  it  is  to  be  permanently  and  for  all  men 
the  highest  form  of  thought,  must  establish  itself 
within  the  common  sense  and  reason  of  mankind. 
And  in  order  to  do  that,  it  must  give  to  the  layman 
the  privilege  of  debate. 

It  is  from  this  point  of  view  that  we  see  the  full 
signiiicance  of  Deism.  It  was  the  initiation  of  the 
lay  movement  in  theology.  The  words  are  accurate 
enough  for  all  practical  purposes.  The  Deist  thought 
himself  competent  to  speak  upon  all  these  points 
which  the  Tradition  of  the  Middle  Ages  had  reserved 
to  the  hierarchy.  AVhether  he  was  really  competent 
or  not  is  no  concern  of  ours.  It  is  his  supreme  self- 
confidence  that  interests  us  here.  And  that,  taken  in 
connection  with  the  fact  that  the  common  feeling  of 
the  eighteenth  century  fully  admitted  his  competence, 
is  a  most  momentous  matter.  For  it  published  and 
spread  far  and  wide  the  belief  that  the  lay  reason 
need  not  shrink  from  applying  to  the  most  sacred 
objects  the  same  methods  of  research  and  examination 
which  commend  themselves  as  means  to  a  richer  and 
more  accurate  knowledge  of  the  world  at  large. 

Criticism  is  not,  primarily,  any  given  set  of  opinions 
regarding  the  Bible.  Not  a  few  "  critical "  opinions 
are  less  "  critical "  than  some  "  traditional "  opinions, 
inasmuch  as  they  are  equally  haughty  and  overbearing 
and,  at  the  same  time,  are  farther  from  the  real  facts 
in  the  case.     Criticism  is  not  this  or  that  opinion  j 


CRITICAL  PRINCIPLE   WINS  ITS  FOOTING      85 

neither  is  it  this  or  that  body  of  opinions.  It  is  an 
intellectual  temperament,  a  mental  disposition.  Its 
premise  is  the  unity  of  truth;  authority  shall  not  draw 
a  line  between '* sacred "  truth  and  "secular"  truth: 
truth  is  one.  The  ideal  is  the  free  study  of  all  facts, 
howsoever  named  and  catalogued.  There  is,  indeed, 
order  and  precedence  in  facts.  And  there  are  diverse 
human  faculties  at  work  in  the  testing  and  authentica- 
tion of  facts.  But  access  to  the  whole  body  of  facts 
must  be  full  and  free.  The  Bible,  if  it  is  to  be  a  per- 
manent part  of  the  Occidental  layman's  world,  —  the 
world  of  political  freedom  and  reverent  devotion  to 
truth,  —  if  it  will  not  content  itself  with  being  the 
"Good  Book"  of  weak  women,  and  helpless  children, 
and  priests  in  petticoats,  must  come  within  reach  of 
the  scientific  reason. 

The  lay  movement  in  theology  was  partly  the  result  Theological 
of  theological  indifference.  The  fearful  religious  wars  i"differeuca 
that  devastated  Europe  for  more  than  a  hundred 
years  Avere  followed  by  a  kind  of  glacial  epoch  in 
theology.  Dogma,  apart  from  the  simple  system  of 
the  Deists,  became  abhorent.  Systematic  divinity, 
long  the  queen  of  the  sciences,  was  now  a  Cinderella.^ 

1  Kant,  in  the  Preface  to  the  first  edition  of  the  Critique^  says 
regarding  metaphysics  :  "  Es  war  eine  Zeit,  in  welcher  sie  die 
A'onigritt  aller  Wissenschaften  genannt  wurde.  .  .  .  Jetzt(1781) 
bringt  es  der  Modeton  des  Zeitalters  so  mit  sich,  ihr  alle  Verach- 
tung  zu  beweisen,  u.  die  Matrone  klagt,  verstossen  u.  verlas- 
sen  wie  Hecuba :  modo  maxima  rerum,  tot  generis  natisque 
potens  .  .  .  nunc  trahor  exul,  inops."  Even  more  truly  might 
this  have  been  said  of  theology  whose  "  ancilla," — handmaid, 
—  philosophy  had  once  been  glad  to  be. 

The  Pope's  suppression  of  the  Jesuits  is  a  striking  proof 
that  the  eighteenth  century  was  the  glacial  epoch  in  theology. 
F.  A.  Wolff's  philological  seminar  (he  died  in  1824)  is  an  illus- 
tration. He  would  not  permit  a  theological  student  to  enter  it 
^Arnoldt,  F.  A.  Wolff,  I,  pp.  97,  98).     This  was  not  because 


86      nisTonr  of  the  higher  criticism 

In  part,  the  lay  movement  was  the  upshot  of  mental 
competition.     We  remember  that  in  the  classic  period 
of  Tradition  mental  competition  did  not  exist.     The 
Greek  and  Koman  classics,  so  far  as  they  were  known, 
were  lowly  handmaids  of  the  established  interpreta- 
tion of  the   Scriptures.     But  with  the  Kenaissance 
"  new  things  "  began  to  compete  with  the  old.    At  first 
the  competition  was  unconscious.      Later,   entering 
into  consciousness,  its  possible  dangers  were  detected 
New  inter-      by  the  guardians  of  the  established  view.     The  new 
fng^with^he  things  being  assigned  to  a  definite  sphere,  the  effects 
old-  of  mental  competition  were  checked  and  controlled. 

Finally,  however,  in  the  eighteenth  century,  the  new 
things  triumphed  for  a  time  over  the  old.  "aSTature," 
or  the  truth  and  experience  lying  outside  all  tradition 
and  lying  especially  remote  from  all  tlieological  tra- 
ditions, became  supremely,  absorbingly  interesting. 
Franklin  with  his  kite  attracted  more  attention  than 
Thomas  Aquinas  Avith  his  Summa.  Linnaeus,  with 
his  reform  of  botanical  terminology,  was  more  signifi- 
cant than  the  most  acute  dogmatician.  Cook,  voyag- 
ing around  the  world,  was  thought  to  be  doing  work 
far  more  important  than  theological  discussion.  The 
centre  of  mental  gravity  had  shifted.^ 

he  abhorred  theology,  but  because  he  wished  to  separate  the 
teacher's  profession  from  the  minister's.  But  this  ousting  of 
the  minister  from  the  higlier  teaching  went  along  with  the  down- 
fall of  theology.  Wolff's  seminar  was  of  great  importance  in 
the  mental  life  of  Germany  (Arnoldt,  I,  pp.  79-88;  Herman 
Schiller,  Gesch.  d.  Padagogik,  1891,  §  27), 

1  (1)  On  the  side  of  the  more  popular  movement.  The  history 
of  modern  feeling  about  Nature  (Gribble,  The  Early  Mountain- 
eers, 1899  (especially  ch.  3) ;  Stopford  Brooke,  Tlieology  in  the 
English  Poets ;  Humboldt,  Cosmos. 

(2)  Hist,  of  the  Novel.  It  is  an  interesting  chapter  in  the 
history  of  the  mental  competition  that  lias  changed  the  face  of 
the  Occident.     Pattison,  speaking  of  the  brilliant  success  of 


CRITICAL  PRINCIPLE   WINS  ITS  FOOTING      87 

But,  -whatever  the  causes,  the  consequence  was  clear.   Dogma  of 
The  entire  dogma  of  infallibility  dissolved.     For  that  goe^J\'o'  '^^ 
dogma  rested  upon  authority,  upon  the  ecclesiastical  pieces, 
right  to  reserve  certain  questions  as  outside  the  com- 
petence of  reason,  as  above  the  reach  of  real  ques- 
tions.     Protestantism,   after  throwing  ecclesiastical 
infallibility  overboard,  let  out  the  last  reef  in  Biblical 
infallibility.    And  with  the  result  that  it  temporarily 
dismasted  itself.      The  whole  conception  of   infalli- 
bility had  to  go.     Under  that  condition  alone  could  a 
critical  study  of  the  Scripture  become  possible.     For 
the  dissolution  of  the  belief  in  infallibility  was  the 
negative  aspect  of  the  positive  work  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  namely,  the  affirmation  of  the  competence  of 
reason  in  all  things,  sacred  as  well  as  secular.^ 

Thus,  the  eighteenth  century  became  a  precipita- 
tion-point in  universal  history,  one  of  those  rare  con- 
junctions of  causes  and  conditions  which  lay  bare  the 
foundations  of  life  and  enable  men  to  ask  the  ultimate 
questions.  The  limitations  of  the  period  were  marked. 
It  lacked  reverence.  It  starved  the  imagination.  It 
had  no  capacity  for  great  poetry.  Its  fundamental 
heresy  was  the  belief  that  the  historical  and  the  ideal 
cannot  closely  touch,  far  less  penetrate  each  other.^ 
But  pronounced  limitations  are  apt  to  go  with  great 

Baronius'  history  and  its  subsequent  disappearance,  says  that 
it  appealed  to  the  " hagiographical  temper":  "the  competition 
of  the  secular  novel,  which  came  in  the  seventeenth  century, 
tended  to  throw  hagiography  into  the  shade  "  {Life  of  Casan- 
bon,  p.  380). 

1  The  dominant  word  in  speculative  things  was  common  sense, 
the  standard  of  truth  and  use  set  up  in  the  bosom  of  the  aver- 
age man. 

2  Kaftan,  Truth  of  the  Christian  Religion,  I,  pp.  249,  250  ; 
Windelband,  Hist,  of  Philosophy,  p.  407  ;  Pfleiderer,  The  Phi- 
losophy of  Religion,  I,  pp.  102-108  ;  Harnack,  Christianiti/  and 
Mistory  (it.  1896),  pp.  19-23. 


88        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

virtues.     It  is  so  with  individuals  and  nations.     It  is 
so  with  historical  periods.     The  defects  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century  waited  upon  its  great  mental  virtue. 
By  its  idolatry  of  common  sense  and  its  worship  of 
reason,  by  the  splendid  self-reliance  it  fostered,  by 
its  glorification  of  the  right  and  duty  of  research  into 
all  the  outlying  facts  that  touch  and  challenge  human 
attention,  it  delivered  the  Occident  from  the  tyranny 
of  dogma  and  Tradition.     The  ground  was  cleared  for 
historical  study. ^ 
The  term  _         The  word  "  critical "  now  broke  loose.    It  preempted 
"critical."      ^^^  g^^^^g  ^^  experience.     Like  the  word  "evolution" 
in  our  own  time,  it  coloured  all  thought  and  was  even 
made  a  substitute  for  thinking. ^     Like  every  word 
that  has  made  a  permanent  fortune,  it  indicated  a  new 
turn  of  feeling.     In  this  case  the  turn  was  revolu- 
tionary.    Tradition  entailed  the  acceptance  of  certain 
long-established  views  regarding  the  Sacred  Books. 
Tradition  having  broken  down,  criticism  took  posses- 
sion of  the  mind,  calling  for  a  fresh  study  of  all  the  data 

1  The  life  and  work  of  Niebuhr  is  a  typical  one.  His  work 
bore  upon  the  entire  field  of  historical  criticism.  An  English 
reviewer  of  the  translation  of  his  Roman  history  bewailed  it 
on  the  ground  that  the  next  thing  to  be  assailed  would  be  the 
early  0.  T.  history. 

2  The  catalogue  of  any  great  library,  s.v.  "criticism"  and 
"critical,"  will  show  that,  with  the  entrance  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  the  word  began  to  run  almost  like  wildfire.  The 
career  of  a  word  is  sometimes  full  of  instruction.  Compare  the 
career  of  the  word  "evolution"  after  the  publication  of  Dar- 
win's Genesis  of  Species.  In  the  Preface  to  the  first  edition  of 
the  Critique,  Kant  said  with  truth:  "Unser  Zeitalter  ist  das 
eigentliche  Zeitalter  der  Kritik,  der  sich  alles  unterwerfen 
muss." 

Tbe  universal  critical  tendency  of  the  eighteenth  century  is 
connected  with  the  movement  toward  social  revolution.  See 
Comte,  Philosophie  Positive,  IV  (1839),  pp.  9-51.  His  words, 
while  exaggerated,  are  suggestive, 


CRITICAL  PRINCIPLE  WINS  ITS  FOOTING     89 


involved.  The  old  source  of  knowledge  must  be  made 
more  of,  and  new  sources  opened.  The  true  text  of 
experience  must  be  discovered,  the  original  facts  laid 
bare. 

The  downfall  of  the  doctrine  of  infallibility  threw 
the  Scriptures  open  to  observation.  As  the  old  con- 
ception of  inspiration  lost  credit,  men's  eyes  were 
enabled  to  see  the  human  aspects  of  the  sacred  text. 
A  good  illustration  of  this  process  is  found  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  "  Purist "  controversy.  The  conservative 
scholars  started  with  the  unconscious  assumption  that 
the  style  of  the  Greek  Testament  could  not  be  a  whit 
less  perfect  than  the  best  "classic"  Greek,  No  "bar- 
barism," no  slips  of  construction,  no  words  which, 
from  a  literary  point  of  view,  were  uncouth  or  awk- 
ward, could  be  found  in  it.  Their  opponents  con- 
tended that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  Greek  of  the  New 
Testament  was  not  "pure,"  did  not  conform  to  the 
classical  standard;  that  St.  Paul  did  not  write  as  well 
as  Plato.  The  debate  lasted  a  long  time.  The  con- 
servatives were  moved  by  the  highest  motives.  Yet 
they  were  as  men  whom  dogma  had  blinded  to  facts. 
The  debate  could  end  in  but  one  way.  The  style  of 
the  New  Testament  is  as  perfect  for  its  purpose  as  any 
style  can  possibly  be.^  But  its  Greek  is  not  classical 
Greek.  And  the  moment  the  old  conception  of 
inspiration  weakened,  the  facts  of  the  case  came  into 
clear  view.- 

The  text  of  Scripture  was  no  longer  defended  or 
enslaved  by  Tradition.  Reason  was  free  to  do  its 
whole  work,  bad  as  well  as  good. 

It  was  natural  that  the  criticism  of  the  text,  the 
so-called  "Lower  Criticism,"  should   first   take  the 

1  Renan,  Les  Evangiles,  p.  99. 

2  Bleek,  Introduction  to  X.  T.,  I,  pp.  58,  69;  Bleek-Mangold, 
Einleitung  in  d.  N.  T.,  p.  13. 


Ancient 
idea  of  in- 
spiration 
dissolves. 


Scriptural 
facts  can 
be  seen. 


90        HISTOBT  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Deists  assail 
Protestant- 
ism. 


The  Roman 

Catholic 

attack. 


field.  The  history  of  Protestantism  made  this  inevi- 
table. On  the  one  hand,  the  Reformed  churches,  setting 
the  Bible  in  opposition  to  the  Church,  made  it  neces- 
sary to  appeal  to  the  original  form  of  Scripture;  they 
would  have  no  patience  with  quotations  from  the  Vul- 
gate. On  the  other  hand,  by  cashiering  the  princi- 
ple of  ecclesiastical  authority,  they  brought  the  text 
within  reach  of  observation.  And,  at  the  same  time, 
by  straining  the  doctrine  of  inspiration  to  the  break- 
ing-point, they  rendered  themselves  morbidly  sensi- 
tive to  any  suggestion  of  uncertainty  touching  the 
original  and  authentic  words  of  Scripture. 

When  the  fierce  religious  wars  of  the  sixteenth  and 
seventeenth  centuries  were  over,  when  men  sat  down 
to  think  in  cold  blood.  Protestantism  was  exposed  to 
attack  in  two  directions.  From  the  rear  the  Deists 
assailed  it.  They  were  free-thinking  laymen.  They 
first  won  the  right  of  free  speech  in  Protestant  coun- 
tries, —  England,  for  example.  Devout  scholars, 
Walton  and  Mill,  had  assembled  a  large  number  of 
variants.  The  Deists  used  these  variants  to  shatter 
the  current  Protestant  conception  of  inspiration. 
"All  is  over,"  they  triumphantly  said,  "with  the  tra- 
ditional views  of  the  Scriptures !  "  How  great  was 
the  alarm  in  England,  how  serious  the  crisis  appeared 
to  the  leading  men  within  the  churches,  may  be  seen 
in  the  life  of  Bentley.^  The  dangers  of  the  situation 
set  him  to  thinking  iipon  the  right  methods  of  reaching 
through  the  variants  to  the  original  text. 

The  Roman  Catholic  scholars  attacked  Protestantism 
in  front.  They  did  not  strain  the  doctrine  of  inspira- 
tion. On  the  contrary,  developing  the  idea  of  eccle- 
siastical infallibility,  they  were  able  to  adopt  more 
liberal  views.     It  served  their  purpose  well  to  prove 


1  R.  C.  Jebb,  Bentley,  1882,  p.  158. 


Criticism." 


CRITICAL   PRINCIPLE   WINS  ITS  FOOTING      91 

that  the  sacred  text  was  not  everywhere  certain  and 
clear.  Thus,  Simon  said  that  the  variants  in  the 
text  could  be  used  "  to  show  that  the  Protestants  had 
no  assured  principle  for  their  religion."^  If  a  great 
scholar,  as  Simon  undoubtedly  was,  could  thus  use  the 
New  Testament  variants  as  a  weapon  against  Protes- 
tantism, beyond  doubt  the  average  Eoman  Catholic 
disputant  used  them  freely. 

This  double  attack  made  Textual  Criticism  neces-  The  "Lower 
sary.  The  life  of  Bengel  makes  very  real  to  us  the 
pain  and  grief  inflicted  upon  noble  natures  by  the  fact 
that  the  text  seemed  to  be  uncertain.  Writing  in 
1725,  he  says,  "  More  than  twenty  years  ago,  before 
Mill  appeared,  at  the  very  beginning  of  my  academic 
life,  when  I  happened  upon  an  Oxford  exemplar,  I 
was  greatly  distressed  by  the  various  readings ;  but  all 
the  more  was  I  driven  to  examine  Scripture  carefully, 
so  far  as  my  slender  abilities  would  permit,  and  after- 
ward, by  God's  grace,  I  got  new  strength  of  heart."  ^ 
Bengel  was  a  man  of  deep   piety.      Living   in   the 

1  "  Pour  montier  que  les  Protestans  n'avoient  aucun  principe 
assure  de  leur  Religion  "  (Hist.  cr.  du  V.  T.,  Pref.).  Credner, 
Einleitung  in  d.  N.  T.,  I,  p.  35.  Beyond  doubt,  this  motive 
played  a  relatively  small  part  in  Simon's  life  ;  he  was  too  great 
a  scholar  to  give  it  large  play.  Still,  the  motive  existed  in  him. 
In  the  average  Roman  Catholic  apologete  it  was  strong  and  lively, 
and  the  Protestants  heard  of  it,  in  season  and  out  of  season. 
The  history  of  the  ancient  doctrine  of  inspiration  falls  into  three 
periods.  (1)  The  formation  of  the  conception  in  the  Catholic 
Church.  (2)  The  Middle  Ages.  The  tendency  toward  an  ex- 
treme doctrine  was  strong  and  steady  (Ilagenbach,  Dogmenge- 
schichte,  s.  v.  "  Inspiration  " ;  Schaff,  Hist,  of  Christian  Church, 
IV,  pp.  613,  G14).  (3)  The  sixteenth  century.  The  Romanists 
made  a  specialty  of  the  idea  of  the  Church  and  so  eased  up  on 
the  theory  of  inspiration.  The  Protestants  exalted  the  Scrip- 
tures above  the  Church  and  so  made  a  specialty  of  the  doctrine 
of  inspiration. 

2  Appar.  Crit.  (2d  ed.,  1763),  p.  634. 


92        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

eighteenth  century,  he  was,  perforce,  a  man  of  reason. 
He  had  no  dogma  of  Church  authority  to  lean  upon 
with  one  arm,  while,  with  the  other,  he  should  deal 
freely  with  the  various  readings.  So  his  reverence 
for  God's  Word  compelled  him  to  take  reason  into  his 
service  and,  no  matter  what  the  pain  he  met,  to  toil 
through  the  mass  of  variants  into  clear  opinions  regard- 
ing the  original  text.  The  labours  of  a  long  line  of 
scholars  have  carried  our  methods  and  our  materials 
far  beyond  Bengel's  standpoint.  Our  conception  of 
inspiration  does  not  expose  us  to  the  mental  distress 
which  he  and  the  Protestants  of  his  time  had  to 
undergo.  But  the  object  of  the  Lower  Criticism  is 
the  same  for  us  as  for  him.  Piety  and  reason  con- 
spire to  set  up  the  ideal  of  the  pure  original  text 
as  the  inspiration  and  reward  of  scholarly  devotion.' 
The  "Higher  The  old  theory  of  inspiration  having  broken  down. 
Criticism."  ^^^^  ^-^e  "  Lower  Criticism "  having  taken  the  field, 
the  "Higher  Criticism"  could  not  long  lag  behind. 
Similar  causes  and  similar  conditions  gave  it  an  ideal 
of  similar  quality.  The  original  text  of  Apostolic 
thought  and  feeling  must  be  discovered.*^ 

1  Hort,  in  Westcott  and  Hort's  "iVeio  Testament'^  (N.Y., 
1882),  II,  pp.  1-3. 

2  The  necessity  of  the  transition  from  the  "  Lower  "  to  the 
"Higher"  Criticism  was  laid  down  plainly  by  Wetstein  :  "  Si 
libros  N.  T.  planius  et  plenius  intelligere  cupis,  indue  personam 
illorum,  quibus  primum  ad  legendum  ab  Apostolis  traditi  fue- 
runt ;  transfer  te  cogitatione  in  illud  tempus  et  in  illam  regionem 
ubi  primum  lect  sunt  ...  ad  hsec  praecipue  attende,  ubi  in 
locum  incideris,  unde  te  per  systema  hodiernum  vel  Theologise 
vel  Logicfe,  aut  per  opiniones  hodie  receptas  expedire  non 
potes."  iVou.  r.  (Amstel,  1752),  II.  p.  878.  Cf.  Semler's  words 
in  Credner,  Einleitung,  I,  p.  44.  Semler  might  have  taken  in- 
due personam  illorum  for  his  motto.  On  the  connection  between 
the  breakdown  of  the  ancient  doctrine  of  inspiration  and  criti- 
cism, see  Michaelis,  Introduction  (tr.  from  4th  ed.  by  Marsh), 
I,  pp.  72-78.     "An  inward  sensation  of  the  effects  of  the  Holy 


CRITICAL   PRINCIPLE   WINS  ITS  FOOTING      93 

From  tlie  sixth  century  down,  the  body  of  knowledge 
concerning  the  New  Testament  was  both  narrow  in 
scope  and  fixed  in  its  outlines.^  Time,  piety,  and 
ignorance  —  a  mighty  triumvirate  —  gave  it  a  most 
imposing  air  of  finality.  It  was  accepted  by  all  men 
as  authentic  and  sutticient.  Even  the  Reformation 
scholars  accepted  it,  for  the  most  part,  without 
demur. ^  It  was  part  and  parcel  of  a  sacred  Tradi- 
tion. By  reason  of  the  ideas  wherewith  it  was 
connected,  it  gave  Christians  of  all  name  mental  satis- 
faction, putting  their  questions  to  rest.  The  little 
handful  of  facts  which  Cassiodorus  gave  to  his  monks 
had  the  authority  of  the  Church  or  the  insi)iration  of 
Scripture  behind  it.  But  when  both  these  dogmas  in 
their  ancient  form  played  the  eighteenth-century 
Protestant  false,  he  immediately  felt  the  need  of  a 
larger  range  of  facts  regarding  the  New  Testament 
books  and  of  a  more  interior  study  of  the  books  them- 
selves.    This  interior  study  grew  out  of  the  desire  to   Traditional 

know  the  New  Testament  from  the  inside,  to  discover   ^?",^^'xt^® 

'  of  the  New 

and  fix   its  original  meanings,  the  true  text  of  its   Testament 
thouglit  and  feeling.     The  desire  for  a  larger  body  of  satfs^fV° 
facts  was  born  of  the  knowledge  that  the  text  of  any 

Ghost  and  the  consciousness  of  the  utility  of  these  writings 
...  I  have  never  experienced  it  in  the  whole  course  of  my 
life."  So  the  question  about  inspiration  gives  way  to  the  ques- 
tion about  genuineness.  A  dogmatic  question  gives  way  to  an 
historical  one. 

1  The  "Introduction"  of  Cassiodorus.  A  small  body  of 
opinions  became  stereotyped.  For  nearly  a  thousand  years  no- 
body felt  the  need  of  examining  them,  still  less  of  going  behind 
them. 

2  Bleek,  Introduction  to  N.  T.,  I,  pp.  16,  21.  Luther  was 
free  in  some  of  his  judgments  on  Biblical  questions.  But  his 
judgments,  while  they  have  considerable  dogmatic  interest,  were 
a  very  slight  contribution  to  historical  study.  On  Bodenstein, 
see  Credner,  Kanon,  p.  201  ff. 


94 


EISTOBT  OF  THE  HIGHER  CRITICISM 


Protestant- 
ism and 
Criticism. 


Germany. 


form  of  human  experience  cannot  be  taken  away 
from  the  context  of  its  time  and  place  and  remain 
wholly  intelligible.  The  backbone,  then,  of  Higher 
Criticism,  as  its  history  interprets  it,  was  the  resolu- 
tion to  know  the  mental  and  emotional  text  and 
context  of  the  New  Testament  books. 

Necessarily,  the  Higher  Criticism  could  not  be 
loyally  developed  save  in  a  Protestant  country.  The 
Roman  Catholic  Church  has  given  the  world  some 
great  Biblical  scholars.  But  something  more  than 
the  work  of  occasional  scholars  was  required,  if  the 
principle  of  the  Higher  Criticism  was  to  be  perma- 
nently established.  A  persistent,  critical  mood,  that 
is,  an  intellectual  temper  which  steadily  impels  men 
to  push  in  behind  traditions  and  legends,  in  order  to 
verify  or  reject  them,  was  demanded.  The  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  by  reason  of  her  doctrine  of  authority, 
could  not  supply  the  demand.  Until  she  fundamen- 
tally changes  her  methods,  she  will  reserve  a  large 
number  of  positions  as  being  not  open  to  question. 
Now,  it  is  of  no  avail  to  permit  men  to  think  freely 
upon  the  Bible,  if  they  will  but  go  far  enough  with 
the  authority  of  the  Church.  Human  reason  is  an 
organic  thing.  It  moves  altogether,  if  it  moves  at  all. 
Freedom  to  deal  with  the  Bible  cannot  keep  house  with 
absolute  obedience  to  an  ecclesiastical  body  as  its 
head.  At  best,  the  marriage  between  them  is  left- 
handed,  or  a  marriage  of  convenience.  The  critical 
work  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  cannot  but  be 
half-hearted  and  unthorough.  The  Higher  Criticism, 
both  as  a  principle  and  as  an  achievement,  must  seek 
its  fortune  in  a  Protestant  land. 

It  fell  to  the  lot  of  Germany  to  give  the  critical 
principle  a  home  and  provide  its  support.  Holland, 
a  leader  of  scholarship  throughout  the  seventeenth 
century,  had  lost  ground  by  the  time  that  the  critical 


CRITICAL   PRINCIPLE  WINS  ITS  FOOTING      95 

mood  came  over  Western  Europe.  England  had  done 
and  was  still  to  do  master-work  in  the  field  of  Lower 
Criticism.  But  by  reason  of  what  was  worst,  as  well 
as  wiiat  was  best,  in  the  England  of  1750-1850,  the 
chance  there  for  free  Bible-study  was  not  great.  The 
strength  of  the  Anglican  Church  in  matters  ecclesias- 
tical—  like  the  strength  of  most  English  things  — 
rested  upon  a  compromise.  The  Bible  was  indeed 
exalted  as  the  supreme,  even  the  exclusive  authority 
in  ultimate  questions.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
English  Church  kept  hold  on  the  principle  of  Tradi- 
tion. And  in  the  third  decade  of  our  century,  at  the 
very  time  when  Biblical  criticism  in  Germany  was 
reaching  its  crisis,  the  Oxford  Movement  gave  to  that 
principle  increased  prestige.  As  to  the  Dissenters, 
while  their  dogmatic  position  touching  Holy  Scrip- 
tures was  clear  and  uncompromising,  they  lacked,  in 
the  eighteenth  century,  both  the  culture  and  the  stand- 
ing in  the  universities  that  was  necessary,  if  men 
were  to  feel  the  full  force  of  the  mental  movements 
of  the  epoch. 

English  Deism  had  seen  some  things  to  which  England, 
orthodoxy  was  blind  and  had  spoken  its  mind  freely 
upon  Biblical  questions.^  However,  Deistic  doubt 
did  not  run  its  full  career  in  England.  It  was  met 
and  overcome,  not  so  much  by  a  mental  as  an  emo- 
tional process,  namely,  the  revival  of  religion  through 
the  Wesleyan  and  Evangelical  Movement.  Finally, 
the  university  life  of  England  was  at  a  low  ebb." 

1  ThusTolfind  in  Nazarenus,  or  Jewish,  Gentile,  and  Mahom- 
etan Christianity  (1718),  discovered  that  difference  of  parties  in 
the  primitive  church  which  afterward  played  so  momentous  a 
part  in  the  criticism  of  the  N.  T. 

Upon  the  English  Deist's  views  of  Scripture,  Leckler's  Gesch. 
d.  Engl.  Deismus,  1841. 

2  Adam  Smith's  well-known  opinion  of  the  English  universi- 
ties: "Their  laws  and  life  arranged,  not  for  the  profit  of  the 


96        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

Even  in  this  particular,  England's  merit  mingled 
with  her  failings.  She  was  just  entering  upon  that 
vast  industrial  expansion  which  ended  by  making 
her  the  mistress  of  the  seas.  This,  together  with  her 
splendid  political  opportunities,  drew  so  deeply  upon 
her  finest  resources  of  purpose  and  character,  that 
the  academic  life  could  not  reach  a  relatively  high 
position. 

Conditions  lu  Germany  all   these   conditions  were   reversed. 

in  Germany.   ^^^^^^  ^-^^  ^^^^^  ^^  Deism,  coming  from  England  by 

way  of  France,  ran  its  full  career.  No  revival  of 
religion  cut  it  short.  Pietism  indeed  played  a  con- 
siderable part,  but  it  could  not  administer  an  emo- 
tional quietus  to  rational  difficulties.  It  could  temper 
criticism  by  causing  sap  to  run  into  it  from  the  religious 
tap-root  of  our  being,  but  it  could  not  choke  off  criti- 
cism nor  postpone  it.  In  Germany  the  eager,  reso- 
lute, self-confident  doubt  which  was  so  considerable  a 
part  of  the  eighteenth  century's  intellectual  staple, 
was  not  fended  off  from  the  Bible.  The  traditional 
opinion  about  the  Sacred  Books  and  their  authors 
caught  its  full  force. 

Into  the  deepest  mystery  of  a  nation's  being  and 
work  we  may  not  hope  to  penetrate.  To  the  marvel- 
lous mental  movement  of  Germany  during  the  period 
that  began  about  1750  we  can  assign  many  occasioning 
causes.     Deeper  than  that  we  cannot  go.     Yet  it  is 

German         enough  for  our  purpose  to  be  assured  of  the  fact. 

philosophy,  ^j^^^  ^i^g  faci;  ^g  certain.  In  the  history  of  the  mental 
experience  of  Europe,  German  philosophy  is  the  only 
possible  parallel  to  the  philosophy  of  the  Greeks.  The 
splendid  bloom  of  rational  effort  and  philosophical 

students,  but  for  the  ease  and  comfort  of  the  teachers. "  Allow- 
ing for  his  exaggeration,  it  is  clear  that  the  mental  life  of  the 
English  universities  from  1750  to  1830  compares  very  poorly 
with  the  German  universities. 


CRITICAL   PRINCIPLE   WINS  ITS  FOOTING      97 

achievement  between  1780  and  1840  was  indeed  short- 
lived, when  compared  with  the  long  career  of  philoso- 
phy in  Greece.  But  in  power,  and  reach,  and  scope 
it  is  every  way  worthy  to  be  compared  with  the  best 
Greece  can  show. 

Inasmuch  as  philosophy  is  the  layman's  interpreta- 
tion of  man's  life  and  world,  it  should  be  clear  that 
the  place  where  modern  philosophy  did  the  great  bulk 
of  its  work  was  likely  to  be  the  place  where  the  final 
questions  regarding  the  Bible,  its  nature  and  its  root 
in  history,  could  be  driven  home.  Germany,  the  land 
of  philosophy,  was  the  land  of  a  masterful  mental 
force  that  would  not  let  any  object,  however  great  or 
imposing,  plead  the  benefit  of  clergy.^  As  the  Canon 
Law  had  yielded  to  the  power  of  the  State,  so  that  men 
in  orders  were  judged  by  the  same  courts  that  tried 
lay  cases,  so  now,  the  old  barriers  between  rational 
investigation  and  the  Scriptures  having  broken  wholly 
down,  the  entire  body  of  Scriptural  fact  and  interpre- 
tation came  under  examination. 

The  German  university  indicated  the  completion  The  German 
of  the  mental  revolution  which  had   begun   at   the   »"iiversity. 
Renaissance.     The  control  of  education   now  passes 
out  of  the  hands  of  the  clergy.     The  secular  power, 
the  State,  assumes  it.    This  means  that  the  discussion 
of  sacred  things  shall  be  carried  on  as  secular  studies 

1  The  "  secularisation  "  of  education  is  a  matter  very  close  to 
the  history  of  N.  T.  criticism.  For  the  bias  and  control  of  edu- 
cation shows  plainly  what  is  the  centre  of  interest  and  what  are 
the  methods  of  studying  the  things  that  are  interesting.  The 
aim  of  modern  teaching  is  to  overcome  the  flivortitnn  rerum  et 
verborwn,  to  get  the  mind  close  to  reality,  to  the  original  texts 
of  nature  and  history. 

Paulsen,  Gesch.  d.  gelehrt.  Unter. ;  Arnoldt,  F.  A.  Wolff,  II, 
pp.  1—30 ;  "  International  Education  Series,"  ed.  by  W.  T. 
Harris;  Raumer,  Gesch.  d.  rddngnyik,  3d  Th.,  2d  Abtheil, 
p.  152  ;  Herman  Schiller,  Gesch.  d.  Pddagogik,  1891. 

H 


98        HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

are  carried  on  —  by  free  research.  The  modern  uni- 
versity is  the  embodiment  of  the  modern  or  critical 
principles  of  insistence  upon  the  original  facts  of 
nature  and  history,  and  upon  nothing  but  the  facts. 
The  university  was  a  mental  workshop  of  a  new  kind. 
Here  the  new  learning  had  its  stronghold.  The  out- 
lying objects  of  knowledge  could  here  keep  up  a  con- 
stant attack  upon  reason,  preventing  the  formation  of 
fixed  and  unchanging  hypotheses.  Here  the  universe 
presses  steadily  upon  the  mind,  forcing  it  to  keep 
open  house  to  new  ideas  and  impressions.  The  very 
atmosphere  of  the  modern  university  is  critical. 
Nothing  can  stay  its  mental  impetus  toward  original 
research.^ 

Theology  in        Hither  Came  theology  to  make  or  lose  its  fortune. 

sity!^"^^^^'  This  was  in  keeping  with  the  Keformation  principle. 
The  theological  seminary,  as  a  place  isolated  and 
detached,  must  be  abandoned.  Theology,  the  study 
of  the  most  sacred  things,  must  think  out  its  system 
in  close  communion  with  the  vigorous  and  tumultuous 
mental  life  of  the  modern  world. ^  And  hither  came 
our  Sacred  Books,  freely  exposing  themselves  to  the 
questions  and  the  cross-questions  of  the  free  reason. 
They  had  entered  into  a  temporary  alliance  with  the 
mediaeval  hierarchy.  They  now  chose  for  themselves 
interpreters  of  a  different  school.  "The  Reforma- 
tion," says  Holtzmann,  "signifies  a  critical  act  which 

1  Paulsen,  TTie  German  University. 

2  Paulsen,  op.  cit.,  pp.  226,  227  ;  Kuyper,  Encydopcedia  of 
Sacred  Theology  (tr.  1898),  p.  026.  Compare  upon  the  history 
of  seminary  education  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  Von 
Schulte,  Can.  Recht,  Bd.  Ill,  1"  Th.,  p.  281,  and  Paulsen, 
German  Universities,  p.  105.  In  the  Protestant  churches  of 
America,  the  theological  seminaries  have  been  more  or  less  iso- 
lated. But  this  is,  on  the  whole,  not  so  much  the  expression  of 
a  deliberate  policy  as  the  result  of  position  and  circumstance, 


CRITICAL  miNCIPLE  WINS  ITS  FOOTING     99 

the  spirit  of  Christianity,  coming  to  itself  and  going 
deep  into  its  own  nature,  exercises  upon  its  entire 
past."^  In  the  German  university  the  Reformation 
principle  could  be  followed  home. 

1  Einleimig  i.  d.  N.  T.,  1886,  p.  176. 


CHAPTER   VI 

PRELIMINARY   WORK   OF    THE    HIGHER   CRITICISM^ 

Richard  EiCHARD  SiMON,  the  Roman  Catliolic  scholar  (t  1712), 

bimon.  -j^^g  been  honoured   by  Protestant  scholars  with  the 

title  "Father  of  Modern  Biblical  Study." ^  They  do 
honour  to  their  own  impartiality  by  thus  honouring 
him.  But  the  correctness  of  the  title  may  be  doubted. 
That  he  was  a  very  great  scholar  is  beyond  dispute. 
That  he  contributed  largely  to  the  material  and  spirit 
of  criticism  is  equally  beyond  dispute.^  And  it  may 
seem  a  waste  of  time  to  debate  over  the  correctness  of 
an  epithet.  Still,  an  epithet  conveys  an  opinion.  If 
it  is  to  be  given  at  all,  it  should  be  given  to  the  right 

1  Literature :  Semler's  Leben  (autobiography)  ;  Vincent,  Hist, 
of  Textual  Criticism,  1899 ;  the  sections  on  the  history  of  Intro- 
duction in  Reuss,  Hist,  of  the  iV.  T.,  tr.  1884  ;  Holtzmann,  JEi7i- 
leitiing  in  d.  N.  J".,  188(5 ;  Mangold's  ed.  of  Bleek's  Einleitung ; 
Bacon,  Introd.  to  the  N.  T.  One  of  the  best  short  histories  is 
found  in  Credner,  Einleitung,  1836. 

2  Bleek,  I,  p.  17  ;  Credner,  Einleitung,  I,  §  24. 

*  Simon  expresses  the  spirit  and  aim  of  modern  criticism  with 
perfect  clearness  :  "  Si  je  n'ay  pas  suivy  la  methode  des  Theo- 
logiens  Scholastiques,  c'est  que  je  Pay  trouv^e  peu  sure.  J'ay 
tach6  autant  qu'il  ra'a  6t6  possible  de  ne  rien  avancer  qui  ne  fut 
appuy6  sur  de  bons  Actes  :  au  lieu  que  la  Theologie  de  I'^cole 
nous  fait  quelquefois  douter  des  choses  les  plus  certaines.  La 
Religion  consistant  principalement  en  des  choses  de  fait,  les 
subtilites  de  ces  Theologiens  qui  n'ont  pas  en  une  connaissance 
exacte  de  I'antiquit^,"  etc.  {Hist.  cr.  du  Texte  du  N.  T., 
Preface) . 

100 


PRELIMINARY   WORK  101 

man.  And  Simon,  great  as  he  was,  cannot  be  called, 
with  literal  accuracy,  the  Father  of  criticism.  For 
the  gist  of  criticism  consists  in  the  direct  application 
of  scientific  methods  to  the  study  of  our  Sacred  Books, 
without  regard  to  authority  of  any  kind,  with  no  con- 
cern save  to  know  the  Bible  as  it  is  in  itself  and  in  its 
history.  Criticism  is  not  primarily  a  body  of  material 
nor  an  apparatus,  but  a  temperament;  and  the  essence 
of  the  temperament  is  the  free  study  of  the  Scriptural 
Canon.  To  this  point  Simon  did  not  come.  His 
opinions,  however  they  might  seem  to  break  with  the 
traditional  conception  of  the  Canon,  remained,  at  least 
as  far  as  form  went,  within  its  precincts. 

The  title,  if  given  at  all,  should  rather  be  bestowed  Semler, 
on  Semler.  For  in  him  the  critical  principle  found  a 
direct  application  to  the  ultimate  question  of  Biblical 
study.  Since  the  fourth  century  the  Canon  had  stood 
before  the  mind  and  imagination  as  a  finished  total,  a 
mystical  unity  free  from  the  suggestion  of  internal 
differences  and  external  changes.  Memory  of  the 
debates,  through  which  opinion  regarding  certain 
books  had  passed,  utterly  perished.  The  primary 
work  of  the  Church,  even  in  the  Nicene  age,  was  not 
Biblical  scholarship.  It  was  anything  but  a  critical 
age.  Its  function  was  dogmatic  theology  rather  than 
interpretation.  Fixed  positions,  finished  statements, 
were  its  end.  Far  more  was  this  the  case  after  the 
fourth  century.  So,  when  once  the  limits  of  the  Canon 
had  been  settled,  the  dominant  mood  of  the  Church 
suppressed  the  ideas  of  process  and  change.  In  the 
course  of  a  few  centuries  the  impression  of  the  Canon's 
divine  immutability  had  so  far  deepened  that  the 
Bible  confronted  the  mind  as  a  thing  so  majestic  that 
no  man  durst  question  it. 

The  Lower  Criticism  nibbled  at  the  edges  of  the 
ultimate  question  regarding  the  Canon.     Work  like 


102      HISTOBY  OF  THE  HIGHEB   CRITICISM 

Simon's  penetrated  far  into  it.     But  it  remained  for 
Semler  to  go  to  the  centre. 
A  typical  Semler's  life  typifies  the  entire  critical  process  of 

Me!  ^^  ^  t^®  eighteenth  century.^  He  was  born  in  1725.  His 
father  being  a  scholar  of  rank,  he  grew  up  within 
scholarly  surroundings.  To  judge  by  what  he  himself 
tells  us  in  his  autobiograjjhy,  his  life  falls  into  three 
periods.  At  the  outset  of  his  mental  career  he  had  a 
very  strong  bent  toward  the  study  of  the  "  Humani- 
ties," history  and  the  classics.  Then  he  came  under 
the  influence  of  pietism,  and  his  interest  in  the 
Humanities  was  checked.^  The  study  of  theology  and 
Scripture  seemed  the  only  thing.  Finally,  before  he 
got  through  the  university,  the  Humanities  returned 
in  triumph.  When,  in  1754,  he  became  professor, 
and  began  to  lecture  upon  Biblical  subjects,  he  marked 
out  the  path  of  historical  study.  He  had  already 
gone  through  and  come  out  of  the  alarms  raised  by 
the  various  readings.  He  now  entered  —  and  he  was 
the  pioneer  —  the  field  of  Higher  Criticism. 

In  his  first  course  of  lectures  he  took  the  principles 
of  exegesis  as  his  theme.     He  found  fault  with  exist- 

1  The  student  should  make  a  detailed  study  of  Semler's  life 
and  work.  In  his  autobiography  (Leben,  1781),  he  gives  us  a 
clear  eighteenth-century  account  of  himself.  The  three  periods : 
(1)  He  had  a  strong  inclination  to  the  "Humanities,"  i.e.  to 
broad  historical  study  of  the  classics.  (2)  Pietism  got  control 
of  him  and  his  interest  in  the  "  Humanities"  declined  {Leben,  I, 
p.  96).  (3)  His  old  love  returned,  the  "  Humanities  "  triumphed 
(II,  pp.  11-120).  Having  already  passed  through  the  terrors  of 
the  "Lower  Criticism"  (II,  pp.  124-126),  he  was  ripe  for  the 
"Higher."  For  the  essence  of  the  Higher  Criticism  is  the 
application  to  the  Sacred  Books  of  those  principles  of  historical 
study  into  which  the  "  Humanities  "  had  led  Semler.  For  Sem- 
ler's general  historical  studies,  see  Hase,  Kiixheiigesch.,  1885, 
1"  Th.,  p.  41. 

2  The  pietistic  attitude  toward  "secular"  learning,  Hagen- 
bach,  §  277  ;  Schiller,  Gesch.  d.  Padcujofjik,  pp.  201,  202. 


PliELIMINARY   WOBK 


103 


ing  methods;  they  stuck  too  close  to  the  devotional 
and  dogmatic  lines  of  interpretation.  True  interpre- 
tation must  be  historical.  The  student  must  cut  loose 
from  temporary  needs  and  go  back  into  the  period 
when  the  Sacred  Books  originated,  and  seek  a  clear 
knowledge  of  the  ideas  of  the  time,  both  the  author's 
ideas  and  those  of  his  contemporaries  as  well.  In 
this  way  he  shall  see  things  as  they  are. 

Semler  expressly  says  that  he  took  his  exegetical 
principles  from  the  Humanities.^  He  thus  exempli- 
fies the  final  stage  in  the  process  of  criticism.  We 
have  seen  (Ch.  Ill)  how  the  Scriptures  came  to  be 
practically  and  theoretically  isolated.  We  remember 
(Ch.  IV)  how  the  first  steps  were  taken  to  over- 
come this  isolation.  The  infallibility  of  the  Church 
was  rejected,  a  first-hand  knowledge  of  Holy  Writ 
was  demanded,  and  the  new  learning  —  the  learning 
of  self-respecting  reason  —  rose  to  honour.  In  Semler 
the  new  learning  came  into  direct  contact  with  the 
Scriptures,  and  the  critical  principle  in  Bible-study 
was  the  result. 

In  1771  he  published  his  Treatise  on  the  Free  In- 
vestigation of  the  Canon.^  The  very  title  advertised 
the  new  principle.  Semler  proved  that  the  traditional 
conception  of  the  building  of  the  Canon  was  mistaken. 
The  Canon  was  not  made  at  a  stroke.  On  the  con- 
trary, it  took  centuries  to  fix  its  limits.  The  opinions 
of  the  ancient  Church  were  not  uniform.  On  the  con- 
trary, the  churches  of  Alexandria,  Antioch,  and  Jeru- 
salem differed  regarding  certain  books.  Even  in  the 
same  church,  opinions  touching  individual  authors 
changed;  the  church  of  Rome,  for  example,  did  not 

1  "  -4ms  humanioribus  "  are  his  own  words  (Leben,  I,  pp. 
208,  209). 

2  Ahhandlung  voti  freier  XJntersnchung  des  Canon,  1771 ; 
Apparatus  ad  lib.  interp.  N.  T.,  1707. 


"  The  Hu- 
manities.'' 


"Freeinves. 
tigatiou  of 
the  Canon." 


104      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER    CRITICISM 


Differences 
found  with- 
in the  New 
Testament. 


always  tliiuk  alike  about  the  Apocalypse.  Thus  the 
idea  of  immutability  was  dislodged  from  the  concep- 
tion of  the  Canon. 

It  now  became  evident  that  the  process  out  of  which 
the  doctrine  of  the  Canon  issued  was  an  historical  and 
human  process.  Like  everything  historical,  it  must 
be  studied.  And  the  study  must  be  free,  with  an  eye 
single  in  its  devotion  to  the  facts  as  they  happened. 
Patient  and  fearless  investigation  is  the  privilege  and 
duty  of  Christian  scholarship. 

Semler  also  called  attention  to  differences  within 
the  New  Testament  literature.  He  perceived  the 
unlikeness  between  Jewish  and  Pauline  Christianity. 
For  sixteen  hundred  years  the  New  Testament  had 
been  thought  of  as  a  divine  book.  The  authoritative 
theory  of  inspiration  made  it  impossible  for  the  human 
to  retain  its  individuality  in  the  immediate  presence 
of  the  divine.  So  the  acceptation  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment as  the  canonic  expression  of  God's  mind  could 
not  go  along  with  the  belief  that  the  New  Testament 
authors  reasoned  as  men  must  always  reason,  unless 
they  would  unman  themselves.  The  Sacred  Books 
could  not  admit  differences.  Everywhere  they  must 
have  the  same  colour  of  feeling  and  thought.  But 
when  the  ancient  theory  of  inspiration  had  fallen,  the 
facts  in  the  case  presented  themselves  to  the  eye. 
Semler  saw  what  Baur  at  a  later  day  made  so  much 
of.  In  other  ways,  also,  he  suggested  the  lines  of 
subsequent  study.  And,  in  a  word,  he  insisted  that 
the  Sacred  Books  must  be  studied  as  human  books. 

That  statement  in  itself  is  a  very  simple  one.  It 
gives  us,  however,  the  end  and  aim  of  improved  Bible- 
study.  Semler,  in  effect,  published  the  news  of  a 
mental  revolution.^    To  study  the  Sacred  Books  as 


1  Creduer,  Einleitung,  I,  p.  43. 


PRELIMINARY   WORK 


105 


human  books  was  to  study  them  historically.  And  to 
study  them  historically  was  to  make  them  their  own 
interpreters. 

The  Reformation  principle  required  that  the  sim- 
ple, historical  sense  of  Scripture  should  be  sovereign. 
Only  so  could  the  supremacy  of  Scripture  be  success- 
fully asserted.  For,  unless  the  simple  sense  is  taken 
as  the  final  sense,  the  allegorical  method,  driven  out 
at  the  front  door,  enters  at  the  back  door.  And,  until 
allegory  is  wholly  gotten  rid  of,  the  Scriptures  cannot 
be  self-interpreting. 

The  life  of  Semler  serves  to  remind  us  that  the 
Higher  Criticism  is  not  primarily  an  analysis  of  docu- 
ments nor  a  study  of  literary  problems,  but  the  final 
chapter  in  the  history  of  interpretation.  Semler, 
passing  from  the  Lower  Criticism  to  the  Higher,  began 
his  work  by  lecturing  on  exegesis.  At  the  outset,  he 
saw  the  necessity  of  taking  the  New  Testament  into 
the  climate  and  circumstances  of  the  Apostolic  age. 
Interpretation  must  be  grammatical.  And  grammar 
must  cease  to  be  at  the  mercy  of  dogma.  The  intrin- 
sic meanings  of  the  New  Testament  language  must  be 
the  final  aim  of  study. ^  But  grammar  alone  does  not 
suffice.^     Interpretation  must  be  historical.     The  stu- 


Tlio  Sacred 
Hooks  are 
human 
books. 


1  For  the  history  of  N.  T.  Grammar,  Winer,  .V.  T.  Gr.  (tr.  by 
Thayer),  Introduction,  %"  Auf.  by  Schmiedel,  1894,  §§  1,  2  ; 
Renss,  Hist,  of  N.  T.,  II,  p.  ;',01  ;  Cave,  Introduction  to  The- 
ologii,  pp.  323,  324  ;  Diestel,  Gesch.  d.  A.  T.,  pp.  150,  620-626, 
6.36  ;  Paulsen,  Gesch.  d.  gelehrten  Unter.,  pp.  54.3-545  ;  Real- 
encyclopiidie,  VI,  p.  290  sq. 

Naturally,  the  principles  of  grammar  come  into  N.  T.  study 
from  the  outside.  Theology  tyrannised  over  the  thought  of 
Scripture  to  such  an  extent  that  they  could  not  grow  up  from 
within. 

2  The  connection  between  "  Criticism  "  and  interpretation  is 
illustrated  by  the  history  of  the  phrase  ''  Grammatical-Histori- 
cal Interpretation  "  which  established  itself  between  1750  and 


100      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

dent  must  realise  the  mental  conditions  both  of  the 
New  Testament  writers  and  of  the  men  to  whom  they 
wrote.  Going  further,  Semler  brought  to  light  the 
fact  that  the  Church's  doctrine  of  the  Canon  was  a 
growth;  and  he  suggested  that  the  New  Testament 
literature  itself,  as  a  human  literature,  was  likewise 
a  growth.  Thus  he  pointed  out  the  way  into  the 
Higher  Criticism  as  the  free  study  of  the  origins  and 
the  literary  relationship  of  our  New  Testament  books. 
All  the  while,  however,  tlie  object  was  true  interpre- 
tation. And  we  must  not  permit  the  manifold  depart- 
ments of  Biblical  study  in  our  own  time  to  blind  us  to 
the  fact  that  this  is  the  final  aim  of  criticism  in  all  its 
forms. 
Michaelis.  The  first  systematic  "Introduction"  of  a  modern 

kind  was  published  by  Michaelis,  in  1750.  The  con- 
trast between  this  and  the  Introduction  of  Cassiodorus, 
in  the  sixth  century,  —  the  standard  book  for  nearly  a 
thousand  years,  —  is  very  instructive.  The  body  of 
data  is  vastly  larger.  This  fact,  by  itself,  betokens 
the  coming  change.  For  the  motive  of  knowledge  and 
its  material  always  interact.  A  growing  body  of  data 
indicates  an  increasing  pressure  upon  the  mental 
framework  approved  by  Tradition.  Again,  in  the 
eighteenth-century  book  scientific  curiosity  plays  a 
very  considerable  part,  while  in  the  sixth-century 
book  it  did  not  exist.     Michaelis  has  an  eager  desire 

1800  as  the  only  correct  description  of  interpretative  methods. 
The  Selbstbiographie  of  Bretschneider  gives  us  light.  See  also 
Bretschneider's  Auslegung  d.  N.  T.  (1806).  He  calls  Ernesti 
the  father  of  the  true  grammatical  interpretation,  but  finds  fault 
with  him  on  the  ground  that  he  lacked  the  broad  knowledge  of 
the  thought  and  feeling  of  N.  T.  times  (he  calls  it  "  dogmenge- 
schichte")  which  is  essential  to  a  "N.  T.  Times"  (p.  10).  On 
the  use  of  "Introduction,"  see  Bacon,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T., 
chs.  1,  2. 


PRELIMINARY   WORK 


107 


to  know  all  that  it  is  possible  to  know  regarding  tlie 
New  Testament  literature;  and  the  possession  of  a 
scholarly  method  insures  a  steady  growth  of  know- 
ledge. And,  finally,  whereas  with  Cassiodorus  the 
ancient  doctrine  of  inspiration  is  in  the  vigour  of 
youth,  witli  Michaelis  it  is  drawing  its  last  breath. 
He  put  forth  four  editions  of  his  book  (1750-1788). 
The  body  of  facts  grows  larger.  The  emphasis  upon 
inspiration  weakens.  The  interior  criticism  —  the 
so-called  "Higher  Criticism"  —  feels  firmer  ground 
beneath  its  foot. 

Problems   now    appeared.      So   long   as  Tradition  Problems 
reigned,  there  could  be  no  real  problems  connected  ^pp*'^'"- 
with  the  Xew  Testament,  because  the  real  facts  in 
the  case  could  not  force  themselves  into  notice.     But 
between  1750  and  1800  the  facts  began  to  come  under 
the  eye.     Problems  arose  forthwith. 

The  Synoptical  Problem,  or  the  question  touching  Synoptical 
the  relations  between  the  first  three  Gospels,  attracted  question, 
attention.  To  Irenseus,  in  the  second  century,  each 
Gospel  was  an  eternal  type  of  evangelical  truth.  Lit- 
erary relationship  between  them,  if  it  existed,  was 
almost  as  insignificant,  as  incapable  of  drawing  and 
holding  curiosity,  as  speculation  upon  the  literary 
connection  between  Plato's  Ideas.  When,  however, 
the  New  Testament  books  came  within  reach  of 
scientific  methods,  it  became  necessary  to  ask  for  an 
explanation  of  their  striking  likeness  and  their  almost 
equally  striking  diversity.^ 


1  Tatian's  Diatessaron  did  not  aim  at  a  "harmony  " ;  it  was  a 
history,  of  the  ancient  Oriental  sort,  and  was  intended  to  put 
more  or  less  out  of  use  the  authorities  upon  which  it  was  based 
(Professor  G.  Moore,  Journal  of  Bib.  Lit.,  1890  ;  Wildeboer,  Die 
Lit.  d.  A.  T.  (1895),  pp.  3,  4).  Irenaeus  contended  for  the  im- 
movableness  of  the  truth  proclaimed  by  the  Church  (1.  9.  5,  10 ; 
3.  3).    The  thought  of  difference  within  the  Gospels  was  beyond 


108      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

The  Book  of  Acts  suggested  questions.  In  1798 
Paulus,  following  a  liint  of  Semler,  took  the  position 
that  it  was  written  with  a  dogmatic  purpose,  to  defend 
the  Apostle  Paul  against  the  attacks  of  the  strict 
Jewish-Christian  party.  A  generation  later,  this 
idea,  taken  up  by  Baur,  became  fruitful  both  of  truth 
and  of  error.  The  interest  attaching  to  it  here  is  found 
in  the  treatment  of  the  book  as  related  to  the  move- 
ments of  mind  and  antagonisms  of  belief  in  the 
Apostolic  age.  It  thus  suggested  the  necessity  of 
studying  the  New  Testament  as  a  literature  in  vital 
relation  with  historical  forces. 

The  Pauline  Epistles  began  to  be  treated  as  real 
letters,  addressed  to  concrete  situations  and  specific 
circumstances.  They  bear  that  character  on  their 
face.  But  the  Church  had  been  unable  to  see  it. 
They  had  been  regarded  as  timeless  books,  possessing 
the  right  of  free  entry  into  all  situations.  Kightly 
taken,  that  is  deeply  true.  All  great  books  are  time- 
less. The  New  Testament  books  are  supremely  so. 
None  the  less,  they  are  related  to  concrete  situations. 
They  are  timeless  because  they  went  so  deep  into  time. 

his  reach  ;  they  are  four  in  number  and  could  not  have  been 
more  or  less  (3.  11)  ;  each  is  perfect  after  its  kind.  This  state 
of  opinion  continued  until  the  sixteenth  century.  Osiander  first 
used  the  title  "  Harmony  "  in  1537.  The  thought  of  difference 
between  the  Gospels  and  of  difficulty  in  harmonising  the  differ- 
ences now  appeared.  But  in  the  first  period  of  the  modern  Har- 
mony, the  defence  was  vastly  stronger  than  the  attack ;  the 
ancient  idea  of  inspiration  prevented  the  discovery  of  any  liter- 
ary problem.  The  Wolfenhuttel  Fragments  (issued  by  Lessing, 
1773-1781)  proclaimed  the  end  of  the  long  reign  of  that  idea. 
The  title  of  Evanson's  book,  The  Dissonance  of  the  Four  Gos- 
pels, etc.,  1792,  is  significant.  Michaelis  published  in  1783  his 
Erkldrung  der  Begrabniss  u.  Anferstehungs  Geschichte  Christi 
nach  d.  vier  Evangelisten.  The  modern  period  of  Gospel 
Criticism  had  begun.  The  relation  of  the  Synoptists  had  be- 
come a  literary  problem. 


PRELIMINARY   WORK 


luy 


They  are  free  of  space  because  they  took  some  one  part 
of  space  with  divine  seriousness.  St.  Paul's  epistles 
are  as  truly  letters  as  those  of  Cicero  and  Pliny.  And 
the  dawning  conception  of  them  as  letters  shuwed  that 
the  historical  study  of  the  New  Testament  was  well 
started. 

Still,  the  criticism  of  this  period,  taken  as  a  whole,    The  criti- 
was  uncertain  in  aim.     It  had  the  vagueness  of  work   this^period 
done  during  a  mental  interregnum,  when  one  great   unsure  in 
conception  has  been  dethroned  and  its  successor  has 
not  yet  been  crowned.     The  New  Testament  books 
were  no  longer  treated  as  if  they  possessed  an  exclu- 
sively  divine    character.       The    human    authors   of 
Scripture  were  now  in  plain  view.     Yet  the  new  prin- 
ciple of  study  was  not  followed  to  its  larger  issues. 

Meanwhile,  Germany  had  entered  an  epoch  grandly 
creative  both  in  literature  and  philosophy.  Lessing, 
Schiller,  and  Goethe  on  the  one  hand,  Kant,  Fichte, 
and  Hegel  on  the  other,  gave  strength  and  spirit  to 
the  imagination,  depth  and  scope  to  reason.  Noble 
feeling  and  resolute  thought  were  interpreting  human 
life  at  large.  How  should  they  interpret  the 
Scriptures? 

The  study  of  the  Old  Testament  was  the  first  to  be 
affected.  In  England,  Marsh,  treating  the  Hebrew 
poetry  in  a  poetical  way,  had  already  indicated  the 
coming  change.  In  Germany,  Herder,  superior  to  Herder. 
jVIarsh  both  in  genius  and  mental  freedom,  made  the 
Old  Testament  seem  contemporary  to  the  doubters  of 
his  time.  He  humanised  it.  The  study  of  the  New 
Testament  had  to  wait  a  while  longer.  But  the  delay 
was  sure  to  be  short.  All  signs  pointed  to  the  quarter 
whence  the  fresh  wind  was  to  blow.^ 


1  The  eighteenth  century  is  the  explanation  of  nineteenth-cen- 
tury criticism.  Biblical  criticism  is  part  of  a  great  common 
movement  of  European  life  and  mind. 


And  in  that  movement 


110      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

the  eighteenth  century  is  the  point  of  precipitation.  The  first 
main  feature  of  the  century  is  that  the  intellectual  enthusiasm 
of  the  Occident  now  begins  to  run  in  a  channel  entirely  indepen- 
dent of  that  in  which  religious  enthusiasm  runs.  The  active 
reason  becomes  wholly  free  in  its  attitude  toward  theology  and 
Tradition.  The  second  main  feature  is  that  a  considerable  part 
of  religious  enthusiasm  now  begins  to  run  in  a  social  channel. 
These  two  things,  working  together,  brought  about  in  the  nine- 
teenth century  a  thorough  change  of  climate  for  the  interpreta- 
tion of  that  total  human  past  of  which  the  Bible  forms  the 
canonic  part 


CHAPTER   VII 

THE    TURNING-POINT    IN    THE    HISTORY    OF    CRITICISM* 

The  complete  breach  with  Tradition,  brought  about  Facts  get 
by  the  eighteenth  century,  enabled  the  facts  of  sacred   of  dogma^ 
history  to  triumph  over  dogma.     For  the  time  being, 
the   New   Testament   suffered.      Its   mysteries   were 
paraphrased  in  terms  of  common  sense.     Its  visions 
were  brought  down  to  the  level  of  earnest,  but  prosaic, 
morality.     The  miraculous,  translated  into  the  lan- 
guage of  the  day,  turned  out  to  be  an  emotional  inter- 
pretation of  commonplace  events.^     Still,  the   price 
paid  for  freedom  was  not  too  high.     Now,  at  last,  it 
was  possible  for  the  Scriptures  to  be  known  as  they 
are  in  themselves.     Reason,  unfettered,  even   auda- 
cious, might  lay  unconsecrated  hands  on  the  Ark  of 
God.     Yet,  when  all  is  said,  the  eighteenth-century 
rationalist  was  not  more  extreme  on  one  side  of  inter- 
pretation than  the  ideal  Pope  of  the  Middle  Ages  was 
on   the   other.      Neither   gave   the    sacred    text    its 

1  Literature  :  Zeller,  David  Friedrich  Strauss,  tr.  1874,  and 
"Ferdinand  Christian  Baur,"  in  Vortnige  u.  Abhandlungen, 
1875,  Vol.  I ;  Schwartz,  Geschichte  d.  neuesten  Theologie,  3* 
Auf.,  1864;  Pfleiderer,  The  Philosophy  of  Beligion,  tr.  1887, 
Vol.  II;  Baur,  Geschichte  d.  Christ.  Kirche,  S--  band  (1862); 
Flint,  Philosophy  of  History  (France),  18'J4  ;  Laurent,  Hist.  d. 
VHumanite,  Vol.  XVI. 

a  De  Wette,  Theodore  oder  des  Zweifler's  Weihe  (1822),  I, 
pp.  20,  21.  This  "novel"  is  well  worth  reading  as  a  part  of 
the  mental  history  of  a  great  scholar  who  passed  through  the 
critical  years  in  the  history  of  criticism. 

Ill 


112      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER    CRITICISM 


Criticism 
in  need  of  a 
controlling 
principle. 


New  Testa- 
ment stud- 
ies loosely 
related. 


rights.  But  the  rationalist  provided  the  negative 
condition  for  tlie  true  understanding  of  the  Bible.  A 
fearless  reason,  insisting  that  the  need  of  knowledge 
is  as  fundamental  as  the  need  of  salvation,  and  that 
all  facts  are  sacred  and  have  a  divine  right  to  be 
studied  from  within,  had  acquired  in  the  field  of  Bible- 
study  a  position  of  vantage  from  which  it  could  not 
be  dislodged. 

Down  to  1835,  however,  the  Higher  Criticism  lacked 
a  controlling  principle.  Much  good  work  was  done. 
Many  suggestive  beginnings  were  made.  But,  on  the 
whole,  it  was  a  period  of  piecemeal  study.  An  organ- 
ising conception,  one  that  should  give  unity  of  view 
and  coordination  of  results,  had  not  yet  appeared. 

The  defects  of  the  period  may  be  best  seen  in  De 
Wette,  because  in  him  the  critical  virtues  of  the  time 
were  at  their  highest  point. ^  He  had  a  clear  and 
fearless  mind,  a  wide  knowledge  of  facts,  a  masterly 
power  of  presentation,  fine  literary  taste,  a  piercing 
judgment  joined  with  deep  religious  feeling.  Yet  his 
studies  of  the  New  Testament  were  mainly  individual 
studies  held  together  by  the  traditional  conception  of 
the  Canon.  The  old  dogmatic  view  of  the  Canon  had 
gone.  The  habit  of  treating  the  New  Testament  books 
as  a  body  of  literature  set  off  by  itself  remained. 
This  was  an  inconsistency.  The  Church  had  drawn 
up  an  authoritative  list  of  books.  The  books  it  can- 
onised were  believed  to  be  of  apostolic  origin.  Their 
inspiration  gave  them  all  a  common  character.  They 
constituted  an  organism,  a  spiritual  body.    Each  book 


1  De  Wette  (t  1849)  was  a  man  of  letters  and  a  theologian 
as  well  as  a  Biblical  scholar,  an  all-round  mind,  free  from  much 
of  the  inlKirent  narrowness  of  the  specialists  of  a  later  genera- 
tion. He  possessed  in  high  degree  the  clear-headed  mental  sobri- 
ety which  was  characteristic  of  Bretschneider  and  other  scholars 
whose  habits  were  fixed  before  1835. 


THE  TURNING-POINT 


113 


was  bound  to  all  the  others  by  the  tie  of  a  common 
divine  nature. 

The  Church  did  not  need  to  know  the  literary  con- 
nection between  one  book  and  another.  Neither  did 
she  need  to  know  the  concrete  historical  situation  to 
which  this  or  that  book  attached  itself,  nor  the  broad, 
historical  background  of  the  Xew  Testament  as  a 
whole.  The  sole,  decisive  question  touching  any  por- 
tion of  the  Canon  was,  Did  an  Apostle  or  an  Apostolic 
man  write  it?^  An  affirmative  answer  assured  its 
footing  within  the  Canon.  And  once  there,  no  ques- 
tions concerning  its  literary  pedigree  or  its  historical 
belongings  needed  to  be  asked.  Indeed,  they  could  not 
be  asked.  For  the  dogma  of  inspiration  not  only  gave 
mystical  unity  to  the  New  Testament,  conceived  as  an 
organism  of  saving  truth,  but  it  so  isolated  it,  so 
separated  it  from  human  literature,  that  such  questions 
became  a  mental  impossibility. 

Bible-study  had  a  real  unity,  a  controlling  prin-  Dogma  of 
ciple.     The  Sacred  Books  were  nearer  to  each  other  ga^ve'iinity 
than  a  man's  mind  and  body,  more  clearly  coherent  ^^.^^^^l  , 
than  the  parts  of  a  noble  statue.     The  mind  of  their     ^   ^"^  ^  ^' 
common,   their   Divine   Author  held  them  together. 
Down  to  the  Reformation,  therefore,  Bible-study  could 
not  be  fragmentary.     And  even  in  the  Reformation 
period  it  suffered  no  loss   of   unity.     Ecclesiastical 
infallibility  had  been  discarded.     Biblical    infalli- 
bility,  however,    remained.      The  human   author   of 
Scripture  had  not  yet  come  into  view.     The  magnifi- 
cent enthusiasm  for  the  pure  Word  of  God,  the  exalted 
sense  of  its  inspiration,  kept  every  part  of  the  New 
Testament  in  vital  touch  with  every  other  part.     All 


1  The  principle  of  Apostolic  authorship  was  not  always  car- 
ried out,  but  it  was  the  iutention.  Cf.  Iloltzmann,  Einleitung, 
pp.  134-160.     Weiss,  Einleitung  (2«  Auf.),  pp.  34,  64. 


114      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

the  results  of  interpretation  were  related.  Nothing 
was  detached. 

But  when  the  ancient  doctrine  of  inspiration 
decayed,  Bible-study  became  piecemeal.  Thus  De 
Wette,  having  given  up  the  Pauline  authorship  of  the 
Pastoral  Epistles,  left  them  adrift,  as  if  they  were 
literary  fragments.  The  reason  was  twofold.  Or, 
rather,  it  was  one  reason  under  two  aspects.  In  the 
first  place,  throughout  a  period  of  sixteen  hundred 
years,  the  sole  question  regarding  any  given  New 
Mechanical  Testament  book  had  been  one  of  apostolic  origin.  It 
'"lity*  was  perfectly  natural,  then,  that  for  a  considerable 

time  after  the  downfall  of  Tradition  — 1750  to  1835 
—  that  question  should  continue  to  be  decisive. 
Hence,  when  De  Wette  —  herein  thoroughly  repre- 
sentative ^  —  settled  the  question  of  Pauline  author- 
ship against  the  Pastorals,  he  seemed  to  have  done  all 
that  the  case  required.  In  the  second  place,  the  New 
Testament  books  having  been  so  long  bound  together 
and  thought  together  by  an  overmastering  dogma, 
the  critical  studies  of  the  New  Testament  books 
appeared  to  have  a  unity  which  in  reality  they  lacked. 
The  shell  of  the  old  dogma  held  them  together  and 
gave  them  vital  relation  and  coherence.  But  in  truth, 
from  the  critical  point  of  view,  this  was  no  better  than 
a  mechanical  unity.  For  criticism  calls  for  an  his- 
torical treatment  of  the  New  Testament  literature. 


1  It  is  the  point  of  view  of  Michaelis,  Eichhorn,  Hug,  Credner, 
etc.  Haenlein's  Introduction  (1794)  will  give  the  student  a  fair 
conception  of  the  purpose  and  scope  of  that  period  in  scholar- 
ship. The  question  of  genuineness  had  supplanted  the  dogma 
of  inspiration.  This  holds  good  on  the  radical  as  well  as  on  the 
conservative  side  of  scholarship,  e.g.  Evanson's  Dissonance  of 
the  Four  Gospels  and  the  Evidence  of  their  Respective  Authen- 
ticity examined  (1792).  But  that  question  was  only  the  half- 
way house  to  a  truly  historical  study. 


THE   TURNING-POINT 


115 


Suppose  the  debate  over  Apostolic  authorship  to  have 
gone  against  a  given  book.  That  is  not  enough.  We 
desire  to  know  its  relation  to  the  great  movement  that 
lies  back  of  the  New  Testament  as  a  whole.  A 
human,  literary  unity  must  take  the  place  of  the  bare 
dogmatic  unity. 

"We  do  not  mean  to  say  that,  down  to  1835,  there  Suggestions 
was  no  attempt  to  give  the  New  Testament  books  a  h|stoHcI1 
local  habitation  and  a  human  name,  after  the  questions  method, 
of  apostolic  authorship  had  been  settled  one  way  or 
the  other.  There  are  hints  and  suggestions  in  De 
Wette.  In  Gieseler's  treatise  on  the  Gospels,  the 
synoptical  question  opens  the  door  into  the  study  of 
conditions  and  movements  within  the  Apostolic 
Church.^  Bretschneider,  in  his  treatise  on  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  after  he  had  rejected  the  Johannine  author- 
ship, proceeded  to  discuss  the  characteristics  of  Juda- 
ism with  which,  as  he  thought,  the  book  concerned 
itself;  and  ended  by  giving  the  Fourth  Gospel  an  his- 
torical habitat  early  in  the  second  century.*  Credner 
urged  the  need  of  apprehending  the  general  mental 
condition  of  the  Apostolic  age.*  Yet  the  only  appli- 
cation of  it  he  made  was  to  condemn  the  notion  that 
the  Christians  of  the  iirst  century  ascribed  to  the 
authors  of  our  New  Testament  books  any  extraordinary 
inspiration. 

On  the  whole,  Schleiermacher's  essay  on  1  Timothy   Schleier- 
(1807)  is  representative  of  the  methods  of  this  period,    ^ximo'thy. 

1  Gieseler,  Versuch  ilber  die  Entmckelung  u.  die  fruhesten 
Schicksale  der  Schi^iftlichen  Evangelien  (1818). 

2  Bretschneider,  Probahilia  de  Evangelii  et  Epistolarum 
Joannis  Apostoli  indole  et  origine.  1820.  A  model  of  sobriety 
and  restraint.  The  specific  reference  is  to  chapter  4.  Upon 
Bretschneider,  Watkins,  The  Fourth  Gospel  (1890),  pp.  179- 
190. 

8  Credner,  Beitrage  z.  Einleitung  in  d.  bib.  Schriften  (1832), 
I,  p.  7,  "  die  gesammtunschauung  der  ApostoUschen  Zeit^ 


116      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Forces  at 
work  upon 
a  new  con- 
ception. 


He  went  through  the  letter  in  detail.  He  compared 
its  style  and  use  of  words  with  Paul's  usage  in  the 
other  epistles.  He  criticised  the  vocabulary,  the  turn 
of  thought,  and  finally  decided  against  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  letter.^  There  he  stopped.  Beyond  this 
question  of  genuineness  the  scholars  of  the  time  did 
not  go.  It  is  well  within  bounds  to  say  that,  down  to 
1835,  the  critical  study  of  the  New  Testament  was 
fragmentary.  De  Wette  is  typical.  He  gives  us  an 
aggregate  of  fine  observations  and  suggestive  conclu- 
sions. But  that  is  all.  There  is  no  unifying  prin- 
ciple, no  controlling  or  coordinating  view.  We  have 
a  number  of  detached  essays,  joined  together  by  the 
fact  that  they  deal  with  different  portions  of  a  litera- 
ture which  the  Church  of  the  third  and  fourth 
centuries  was  pleased  to  canonise. 

Yet,  throughout  the  first  years  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  and  even  earlier,  forces  were  at  work  which 
paved  the  way  for  a  conception  that  should  give 
coherence  and  order  to  the  results  of  critical  study. 
It  was  that  idea  of  humanity  which  is  the  ruling  idea 
of  our  time.^     So  long  as  theology  was  the  queen  of 

1  Schleiermacher,  Ueber  den  sogenannten  ersten  Brief  des 
Paulus  an  den  Timotheos,  1807. 

2  Edgar  Quinet,  Le  Christianisme  et  la  revolution  frant^aise, 
184.5;  Laurent,  Hist,  de  V Hinnanite,  XVI ;  Kettner,  Literatur' 
gesch.  d.  achtzehnten  Jahr.,  Ill,  3,  abth.  2  ;  Stopford  Brooke, 
Theology  in  the  English  Poets;  Morley,  Rousseau;  Baur, 
Christ.'  Kirche,  V,  pp.  41^5;  R.  Haym,  Herder,  1880-1885; 
Otto  Pfleiderer,  Philosophy  of  Religion,  I,  pp.  203-225 ;  Blunt- 
schli,  Staatsioorterhuch,  VI,  p.  428. 

The  story  of  the  building  of  the  idea  of  Humanity  is  as  im- 
portant for  our  knowledge  of  our  own  time  as  is  the  building  of 
the  idea  of  the  primitive  family  and  tribe  for  our  understanding 
of  the  men  of  antiquity.  Cf .  Coulanges,  La  Cite  Antique  (ed.  of 
1895);  Hearn,  The  Aryan  Household,  1891;  Maine,  Ancient 
Law ;  Robertson  Smith,  The  Religion  of  the  Semites,  2d  ed., 
Lect.  2. 


THE   TURNING-POINT  117 

reason,  the  idea  of  God  overbore  the  idea  of  humanity. 
It  will  help  us  at  this  point  to  remember  once  more 
that  the  history  of  Bible-study  is  just  one  aspect  of  a 
much  vaster  history.     We  cannot  separate  it  from  the 
general  movement  of  Christian  experience.     So  we 
need  to  keep  clearly  in  mind  the  fact  that  the  main 
characteristic  of  Bible-study  down  to  the  eighteenth 
century  was  in  unison  with  the  temper  and  disposition 
of  Christian  thought  as  a  whole.     Theology  was  the 
main  concern  of  deep-minded  men.     Now,  the  the- 
ology of  that  time,   with  all  its  great  merits,   had 
one  very  serious  fault.    It  made  the  idea  of  God  alto-  The  idea  of 
gether  too  transcendent.      Just  as,   in   practice,  the  oid™heolo^ 
picked  meia  and  women  thought  it  necessary  to  go  out- 
side the  bounds  of  the  common  life,  and  to  cooperate 
with  one  another  through  a  monastic  organisation, 
in  order  to  become  intimate  with  God;  so,   in  the- 
ory, the  best  thought  of  the  time  deemed  it  neces- 
sary to  exalt  the  idea  of  God  above  history  in  order  to 
insure  its  purity  and  majesty.     As  long  as  the  ten- 
dency lasted,  the  idea  of  God  overpowered  the  idea  of 
humanity. 

Nevertheless,  the  genius  of  Christianity  demanded  Christianity 
that  the  idea  of  humanity  should  be  as  deeply  empha-  f^^  uman- 
sised  as  the  idea  of  God.  Upon  any  other  footing, 
the  Biblical  view  of  revelation  is  undone.  And 
within  the  institutions  of  the  Church,  even  when  they 
were  most  monastic,  were  tendencies  that  exalted  our 
nature.  Even  her  errors  leaned  in  this  direction. 
The  worship  of  the  Virgin,  the  coronation  of  the 
Papacy,  were  indirect  ways  of  magnifying  the  capacity 
of  the  race.  And  the  ideal  of  a  Catholic  communion, 
mistaken  as  its  expressions  sometimes  were,  and  per- 
verted its  methods,  drew  its  sap  from  the  inmost  being 
of  Christianity.  For  our  religion  is  bottomed  upon 
the  most  impassioned  faith  in  the  spiritual  unity  of 


118      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

mankind ;  since,  without  this,  the  unity  of  God  were  an 
empty  theological  formula.  To  an  equal  degree  is  it 
built  upon  an  impassioned  faith  in  the  spiritual 
capacity  of  our  nature.  The  doctrines  of  the  Incar- 
nation and  the  Kingdom  of  God  refuse  to  have  it 
otherwise. 

When,  therefore,  the  idea  of  humanity  came  on  the 
field  of  Biblical  study,  it  was  not  at  all  the  case  that 
the  Sacred  Books  of  Christianity  were  given  over  to 
the  tender  mercies  of  an  alien.  On  the  contrary,  we 
find  herein  a  striking  illustration  of  the  truth  that 
God  comes  to  his  goal  by  roads  which  his  children,  in 
the  omniscience  of  their  ignorance,  consider  aimless 
and  roundabout.  The  idea  of  humanity  is,  in  the 
main,  a  creation  of  the  Christian  religion.  But  it  had 
to  break  away  from  the  control  of  dogmatic  Chris- 
tianity in  order  to  gain  self-confidence.  It  found  a 
mighty  ally  in  the  Humanities,  the  study  of  the 
knowledge  and  inspiration  given  by  God  along  lines 
outside  the  education  and  experience  of  Israel.  With 
the  State,  rising  into  dignity  and  power,  it  struck  a 
covenant.  Then,  grown  strong,  and  even  over- 
bearing, it  went  back  to  study  the  Scriptures.  So  far 
as  appearances  are  concerned,  it  came  from  outside. 
In  reality,  it  came  from  within.  When  tempered  and 
chastened,  it  was  to  manifest  itself  as  the  spirit  of 
Christ  in  modern  men  communing  with  the  spirit  of 
Idea  of  hu-     Christ  in  the  Scriptures. 

manity  in  Great  conceptions  form  slowly.    But,  after  the  long 

century.  preparatory  stages  have  elapsed,  the  final  touches  are 
quickly  given.  For  seventeen  hundred  years  the 
Biblical  view  of  history  and  life,  aided  by  the  ideal 
elements  in  Greek  and  Eoman  culture,  pressed 
steadily  upon  the  mind  of  the  Occident.  An  idea 
new  to  the  world's  thought  was  formed.  In  the 
eighteenth  century  it  was  clearly  expressed.     Eous- 


THE  TURNING-POINT  119 

seau  preached  it  with  contagious  passion.'  Herder 
carried  it  into  the  study  of  history.  The  Revolution 
made  it  a  social  programme.  Through  the  poets  it 
passed  into  the  blood  of  Europe. 

When  we  look  back  from  the  Revolution  to   the   The  Renais- 
Renaissance,  we  become  aware  of  a  mighty  change.    the'Kevolu- 
In  the  earlier  period  the  term  "  Humanity  "  denoted  tion. 
a  new  kind  of  literaiy  interest,  the  eager  study  of  the 
Classics,  the  appropriation  of  the  food  for  thought  and 
admiration  furnished  by  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  in 
distinction  from  the  food  so  long  provided  by  theology. 
But  in  the  days  of  Rousseau  and  Herder  and  Kant, 
the  term  stood  for  a  creed.     The  sense  of  humanity 
had  become,  in  effect,  a  religion. 

If  we  have  not  already  seen  that  the  history  of  the 
Higher  Criticism  is  the  story  of  something  far  larger 
than  a  scholastic  process,  we  should  see  it  now.  The 
specific  results  of  criticism  have  been  made  possible 
by  the  existence  of  a  body  of  academic  students, 
broadly  separated  —  as  in  Germany  —  from  pressing 
practical  problems,  possessing  leisure,  and  sitting  at 
ease,  for  the  most  part,  regarding  the  absorbing  tasks 
and  grinding  institutional  necessities  of  a  great 
Church.-  But  the  deeper  causes  of  criticism  have 
been  collective  forces,  forces  that  are  part  and  parcel 
of  the  total  life  of  the  Occident.     Xeither  the  divine 

1  See  Kant,  ed.  Erdmann  (4th),  pp.  18,  19.  Kant  was  deeply 
influenced  by  Rousseau.  He  strikes  a  new  note  for  the  motive 
of  philosophy  as  well  as  for  its  method.  The  critical  philosophy 
is  to  be  the  servant  of  Humanity. 

2  Stretching  our  words  a  little,  we  might  venture  to  say  that 
there  are  two  main  types  of  churchmen.  There  is  the  man 
whose  chief  concern  is  the  creation  and  maintenance  of  institu- 
tions. And  there  is  the  man  whose  primary  interest  is  specu- 
lation, the  free  play  of  thought.  Palestinian  and  Alexandrian 
Judaism  give  us  illustrations  from  ancient  times.  In  modem 
times,  examples  abound. 


120      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

necessity  of  criticism  nor  its  actual  course  can  be 
appreciated,  if  we  insist  upon  treating  it  as  wholly  an 
affair  of  the  school. 

This  fact  stands  out  plainly  from  the  genealogy  of 
the  great  conception  that  was  to  give  unity  and  cohe- 
rence to  the  work  of  the  New  Testament  scholars.  It 
was  given  to  them  out  of  hand  by  the  deepest  spiritual 
tendencies  of  the  eighteenth  century.  The  genius  of 
Christianity  conceived  the  idea  of  humanity.  The 
breakdown  of  Church  authority,  the  breach  with  Tra- 
dition, the  decay  of  theology,  brought  it  to  the  birth. 
And  the  rise  of  the  State  to  spiritual  dignity,  the 
ennobling  of  the  secular  interests  of  mankind,  the  dis- 
covery and  majesty  of  the  visible  universe,  by  giving 
new  meaning  and  scope  to  the  terrestrial  experience 
of  man,  provided  the  field  and  climate  for  its  growth 
and  prestige. 
Hegelian  The  philosophy  of  Hegel  endowed  the  new  idea 

philosophy,  -^ith  an  efficient  organ.  For  in  him  German  philoso- 
phy, self-confident  and  masterful,  refusing  to  recog- 
nise as  divine  anything  that  did  not  make  itself 
organic  to  the  human,  turned  back  to  interpret  the 
entire  experience  of  the  race.  He  viewed  human 
experience  in  its  totality.  He  conceived  history  as 
its  autobiography.  Every  book  lianded  down  by  the 
past,  whether  labelled  "secular"  or  "sacred,"  must  be 
treated  as  the  record  of  a  genuinely  human  experience. 
And  nothing  is  fragmentary.  The  literature  of  a 
nation,  the  literature  of  a  period,  constitutes  an  organ- 
ism. The  individual's  thoughts,  to  be  intelligible, 
must  be  interpreted  as  part  of  a  body  of  thought. 
Thus  Hegel  planned  a  new  department  of  study,  — 
the  Philosophy  of  History.^ 

1  On  the  history  of  the  philosophy  of  history,  Flint,  book 
quoted  ;  also  his  F?co ;  and  Laurent,  Hist,  de  V Humanite,  XVIII. 
It  is  an  interesting  fact  that  the  first  edition  of  Vico's  Scienza 


THE  TURNING-POINT  121 

For  our  purpose,  it  does  not  matter  how  largely  cer- 
tain parts  of  it  resemble  a  fairy  story,  nor  how  high 
the  hand  wherewith  Hegel  shapes  facts  to  the  liking 
of  his  theory.  "We  are  concerned  solely  with  the  fact 
that  the  Philosophy  of  History  was  the  theoretic 
expression  of  the  idea  of  humanity  and  with  the 
attendant  fact  that  Hegel  included  within  his  plan 
the  entire  movement  recorded  and  attested  by  the 
Scriptures. 

Here  was  the  organising  principle,  the  controlling  The  orRanis- 
and  coordinating  conception  for  which  criticism  had  '"^.^ki'T^^^ 
been  waiting.  After  1750  the  emphasis  upon  the 
human  authors  of  the  New  Testament  books  steadily 
gained  strength.  When  Eichhorn,  in  1804,  laid  down 
the  rule,  "  The  New  Testament  writings  are  to  be  read 
as  human  books  and  tested  in  human  ways,"^  schol- 
arly opinion  had  ripened  far  enough  to  give  it  a  frank 
adherence.  But,  as  the  case  of  Eichhorn  himself  — 
to  say  nothing  of  Schleiermacher,  Bretschneider,  and 
De  Wette  —  clearly  proves,  the  rule  did  not  give 
coherence  to  Bible-study.  In  its  application,  it  was 
a  rule  of  literary  method  rather  than  a  principle  of 
broad,  historical  interpretation. 

Hegel's  contribution  to  Bible-study  —  not  the  less  Hegei's  con- 
significant  because  it  was  indirect  —  lay  in  the  fact  j^^^bie-study 
that  he  carried  the  philosophical  idea  of  humanity 
into  the  field  of  Biblical  interpretation.  Revelation 
is  to  be  thought  of  as  a  genuinely  human  process. 
The  Words  of  God  are  spoken  and  His  thoughts  worked 
out  within  the  precincts  of  human  consciousness.    The 

Nuova  issued  in  1725,  the  second  in  1782.  The  philosophical  in- 
terpretation of  history  began  at  the  same  time  with  the  outburst 
of  the  criticism  of  historical  sources.  On  the  naive  faith  of 
Hegelianism  in  its  own  infallibility,  cf.  Trendelenburg,  Beitrdge 
z.  Phil.,  1846,  p.  ix. 

1  lu  Holtzmann,  Einleitung,  p.  184. 


122      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Organic 
view  of 
tilings. 


Crisis  of 
1835. 


1^  ew  Testament,  then,  must  be  treated  as  a  thoroughly 
human  book.  Furthermore,  it  must  be  treated  as  the 
product  of  a  human  life.  And  since  the  life  realised 
itself  as  a  total,  all  its  parts  being  interknit,  the 
literature  of  the  life  must  be  regarded  as  an  organism. 

The  eighteenth  century  strongly  inclined  to  a 
mechanical  and  atomistic  view  of  things.  It  bor- 
rowed its  illustrations  from  physics  and  mathematics. 
It  viewed  language  as  an  invention,  not  a  growth.  It 
took  Robinson  Crusoe,  the  self-sufficient  man  on  an 
island,  as  the  unit  of  thought  and  feeling.  But  the 
nineteenth  century  turned  toward  the  organic  realm 
for  its  conception  of  human  method.^  And  Hegel 
embodied  this  method  to  the  full.  He  even  carried  it 
to  excess.  Humanity  became  too  strong  for  men. 
He  treated  history  largely  as  an  affair  of  the  idea. 
Individuals  lost  their  footing.^  But  the  great  gain 
was  that  the  New  Testament,  being  conceived  as  a 
human  literature,  was  also  conceived  as  a  body,  an 
organism,  of  thought  and  feeling,  all  its  parts  related 
both  to  one  another  and  to  the  forces  making  through 
the  great  empire  wherein  they  took  shape. 

The  application  of  Hegelian  principles  to  Bible- 
study  brought  about  a  crisis.  In  the  year  1835 
appeared  three  books,  all  written  by  Hegelians.* 
The  first  was  Vatke's  Old  Testament  Theology.  It  is 
mentioned  here  because  it  helped  to  indicate  the  tran- 

1  Paulsen,  Gesch.  d.  gelehrt.  Unterrichts,  p.  513. 

2  Ranke,  quoted  in  Lorenz,  Geschichtswissenschaft,  II,  p.  58. 

8  Schwartz,  Gesch.  d.  Theologie,  pp.  3,  4  ;  Pfleiderer,  Develop- 
ment of  Theology,  p.  209.  For  a  qualification  on  the  statement 
that  Strauss  and  Baur  were  Hegelians,  Baur,  Christ.  Kirche, 
V,  p.  359,  and  Zeller,  Vortrage,  p.  401.  Zeller  empliasises  Baur's 
relation  to  Schleiermacher.  For  an  admirable  sketch  of  the 
difference  between  Schleiermacher  and  Hegel,  see  Baur,  ib.. 
pp.  350-355.  Yet  the  statement  of  the  text  is  substantially 
sound. 


THE  TURNING-POINT 


123 


sition  of  Hegelianism  from  the  stage  of  philosophy 
to  the  stage  of  criticism,  and  also  because  it  showed, 
through  its  treatment  of  the  Old  Testament  as  the 
record  of  a  nation's  religious  experience,  what  the 
main  consequence  of  the  transition  was  to  be.  The  sec- 
ond was  Baur's  treatise  on  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  The 
third  was  Strauss's  Life  of  Jesus,  in  its  results  and 
bearings  the  most  significant  book  that  has  marked 
the  course  of  Bible-study  since  1750,  Altogether, 
1835  is  something  more  than  a  date  in  the  history  of 
literature.  It  stands  for  a  new  turn  and  direction  in 
the  Higher  Criticism. 

The  standpoint  in  the  Hegelian  view  of  revelation   Roads  from 
was  the  belief  that  no  truth  can  be  divine  for  man,    jntoViWe-™ 
unless  it  has  been  thought  out  within  and  appropriated  study, 
by  an  integral  human  consciousness.     From  this  posi- 
tion two  diverging  roads  ran  into  the  field  of  inter- 
pretation.    A  disciple  of  Hegel  might  emphasise  the 
life  of  Christ  as  an  objective  thing  which,  while  enter- 
ing history  through  human  feeling  and  thought,  stood 
objectively  before  feeling  and  thought  in  order  to  be 
apprehended.      In  that  case  he  might  find  himself 
somewhere  near  the  position  of  orthodox  Christianity. 
Or  he  might  exclusively  emphasise  the  subjective  ele- 
ment in  the  New  Testament,  thinking  of  nothing  but 
the  process  of  human  experience. 

Strauss  took  the  latter  road.  He  was  not  spiritu-  Strauss, 
ally  interested  in  facts  as  such.  Only  the  facts  that 
are  facts  for  and  within  the  mind,  touched  him  to  the 
quick.  He  did  not  deal  with  a  Christ  who  is  a  spir- 
itual centre  in  an  historic  order  of  things.  The  only 
Christ  he  would  have  us  know  is  the  Christ  within 
the  Christian  consciousness.  His  own  Christianity, 
in  the  year  1835,  was  largely  the  philosophical  product 
of  his  own  genius.  It  was  a  great  system  of  ideas 
resting  upon  his  own  reason  as  its  base.     So,  very 


124      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Historical 
fact  no  part 
of  religion. 


Nemesis  on 
the  allegori- 
cal method. 


naturally,  lie  assumed  that  the  Christ  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament is,  for  the  most  part,  the  creation  and  product 
of  the  Christian  consciousness.  The  question,  How 
far  is  the  Christ  of  the  New  Testament  an  historical 
figure?  seemed  to  him  a  question  foreign  to  the  genius 
of  Christianity.  That  there  was  a  nucleus  of  histori- 
cal reality  he  did  not  dream  of  denying.  But  to  him 
it  appeared  to  be  relatively  small.  And  whether  it 
was  large  or  small  was  an  immaterial  point.  The  sole 
essential  thing,  he  said,  is  the  fundamental  law  of 
our  common  nature  and  thought.  This  law,  at  work 
within  the  Christian  consciousness  upon  the  real  or 
supposed  facts  in  the  life  of  Jesus,  created  the  Christ 
of  the  New  Testament. 

Possibly,  no  more  naive  book  than  the  first  edition 
of  the  Life  of  Jesus  was  ever  written.^  Strauss  sup- 
posed, in  good  faith,  that  he  was  sacrificing  only  the 
accidents  of  Christianity.  For,  like  the  eighteenth- 
century  man,  he  assumed  that  historical  fact  can  be 
no  vital  part  of  religion.  He  believed  that  his  inter- 
pretation preserved  the  entire  spiritual  essence  of 
Christianity.  He  declared  that  his  method  of  exegesis 
was  similar  to  Origen's.  Allegory  had  been  for  ages 
the  approved  method  of  the  Church.  He  was  merely 
doing  what  the  Church  had  done  on  a  vast  scale.* 

In  part,  Strauss  was  right.  Christianity  has  always 
rested,  and  will  always  rest,  upon  the  historic  facts  of 
Scripture, —  above  all,  upon  the  life  of  Christ.  But  the 
allegorical  method  of  interpretation  that  dominated 
the  Church  for  sixteen  hundred  years,  obscured  the 
historical   foundations  of  Christianity  by  means  of 

1  Strauss,  Leben  Jesu,  18.35,  I,  p.  vii :  "Den  inneren  Kern 
des  christlichen  Glaubens  weiss  der  Verfasser  von  seinen  krit- 
ischen  Untersuchungen  voUigunabhangig";  Pfleiderer,  Develop- 
ment of  Theology,  pp.  213-217. 

2  Strauss,  ib.,  I,  pp.  6-51 ;  Pfleiderer,  ib.,  pp.  213-215. 


THE  TURNING-POINT  125 

the  vast  dogmatic  structure  Avhich  was  built  up  on  the 
facts.  For,  as  we  have  plainly  seen,  when  once  the 
doctrine  of  infallibility  had  preempted  the  Christian 
consciousness,  it  became  necessary  to  slur  over  the 
simple  historical  sense  of  the  Scriptures.  Or,  if  it 
was  not  slurred  over,  it  was  looked  upon  as  constitut- 
ing a  single  element  within  a  much  larger  body  of 
tliought.  Now,  as  men  interpret  Christ's  book,  so 
will  they  interpret  the  Master  himself.  To  obscure 
the  sense  of  Scripture  was,  in  effect,  to  overlay  the 
cardinal  facts  of  Christianity  with  philosophical  and 
theological  speculations.  Hence,  while  nobody  save 
Strauss  could  suppose  that  the  total  tendency  of 
Strauss  closely  resembled  that  of  Origen,  the  resem- 
blance was  close  enough  to  explain  an  honest  error. 

By  a  slight  stretch  of  words,  Strauss  might  be  called 
the  enfant  terrible  of  the  allegorical  system.  The 
implicit  assumption  of  the  system  is  that  the  prime 
thing  in  Scripture  is  not  the  plain  historical  sense  nor 
the  original  historical  facts,  but  the  spiritual  ideas 
for  which  the  facts  stand  as  symbols.  Now,  this 
assumption  disagrees  with  the  Scriptural  conception 
of  revelation.  In  truth,  it  causes  the  Scriptures  to 
Platouise.  If  it  could  have  had  its  way  in  the  Church, 
it  would  have  substituted  a  splendid  body  of  ideas 
for  the  saving  facts  of  our  religion.  Of  course,  it 
could  not  have  its  way.  Neither  the  powers  of  Hades 
nor  the  speculation  of  philosophers  could  remove  the 
Church  from  her  foundation.  But  in  so  far  as  the 
allegorical  system  did  have  its  way,  the  true  nature 
of  revelation  was  clouded  over.  We  may  say,  then, 
that  Strauss  let  out  the  secret  of  the  old  exegetical 
methods.  He  was  the  divine  nemesis  upon  a  faulty 
and  imperfect  interpretation. 

For,   what   he   did,    in   distinction   from  what  he   Annihilation 
thought  he  was  doing,   was  to  annihilate  the  very  of  Chnstiau- 


126      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


The  ulti- 
mate 
question. 


Life  of 
Christ  fun- 
damental. 


being  of  Christianity.  He  made  out  the  Christ  to  be 
the  creation  of  the  Church.  He  undid  the  Biblical 
idea  of  revelation.  He  volatilised  the  redemptive 
deeds  of  God  into  a  metaphysical  system.  And  thus 
he  drove  Christianity  to  its  last,  its  one  true  line  of 
defences,  —  the  original  facts  of  revelation. 

Protestant  Christendom  was  nov  compelled  to  put 
to  itself  the  ultimate  question.  Criticism  must  go 
down  to  the  roots.  The  mental  work  of  the  Church, 
in  the  period  when  the  doctrine  and  limits  of  the 
Canon  were  laid  down,  was  credal  and  dogmatic. 
The  mental  work  of  the  Church  in  our  period  must 
needs  be,  for  the  most  part,  critical  and  historical. 
And  to  Strauss,  more  than  to  any  other  one  man,  we 
owe  the  final  clearing  up  of  our  ideas  about  the  New 
Testament.  His  challenge  to  Protestant  Christians 
was  God's  challenge  to  Christianity  as  a  whole. 

The  first  main  consequence  was  that  the  life  of 
Christ  was  seen  to  be  the  heart  of  Bible-study.  The 
churches  had  conceived  the  Bible  too  abstractly.  The 
connection  between  the  book  of  Christ  and  the  person 
of  Christ  had  not  been  sufficiently  close  and  vital. ^ 
But,  after  1835,  the  life  of  the  Saviour  became  the 
fundamental  question.  Herein  the  work  of  Strauss 
and  the  work  of  Schleiermacher  joined  consequences. 
For  Schleiermacher,  before  1835,  had  proclaimed  the 
need  which  Strauss's  work  made  so  plain.  The  total 
result  was  to  make  the  person  of  Christ  central. 
Henceforward,  the  study  of  the  historical  life  of  our 
Lord  commanded  attention  precisely  as  the  question 
touching  the  Logos  commanded  it  in  the  third  and 
fourth  centuries.'^ 

1  Hagenbach,  Dogmengeschichte,  §  212,  especially  n.  1. 

2  Fairbairn,  Place  of  Christ  in  Modern  Theology.  The  study 
of  the  life  of  Christ  is  a  modern  study.  In  the  Nicene  period 
the  Logos  doctrine  filled  the  mind.    In  the  Middle  Ages,  the 


THE   TURNING-POINT  127 


The  second  main  consequence  was  a  more  eager  and   Gospel« 
careful  study  of  the  Gospels,  —  the  sources  of  our  ^gg^y 
knowledge  regarding  our  Lord.     Strauss  himself  did   studied. 
not  go  deep  into  Gospel  criticism.^     He  thought  that 
the  Gospels  abounded  in  unhistorical  matter, — the 
miracles  in  particular  being  plainly  such.     His  object 
Avas  to  remove  all  such  matter  from  the  original  text. 
Hence,  his  work  was  almost  wholly  a  criticism  of  the 
Gospel  story.     Only  in  a  secondary  sense  was  it  Gos- 
pel  criticism.     But   the   direct  result  was  that  the 
study  of  the  Gospels  entered  a  new  stage. 

In  1838  appeared  Ullmann's  book.  Historical  or 
Mythical.^  It  was  more  dogmatic  than  critical.  Its 
aim  was  to  prove  that  Christianity  is  unintelligible 
save  as  the  creation  of  Christ,  and  thus  to  cut  the 
ground  from  under  the  feet  of  Strauss.  But  it  showed 
clearly  that  the  bearings  of  the  latter's  work  were 
immediately  understood.  Strauss  was  the  thorn  in 
the  flesh  of  evangelical  Christians.  Gospel  criticism 
became  a  matter  of  life  and  death. 

In  the  same  year  came  Weisse's  Evangelical  His- 
tory.^ The  temper  and  method  of  the  book,  contrasted 
with  Eichhorn's  hypothesis  of  an  "  Original  Gospel " 
(1804),  show  a  decided  change,  though  the  change  is 
not  all  advance.  But  the  emotional  colour  is  livelier, 
the  religious  interest  is  keener.     Evidently,  Gospel 

life,  so  far  as  it  was  treated  at  all,  was  treated  devotionally. 
The  eighteenth  century,  turning  loose  a  free  and  destructive 
doubt  upon  Christianity,  made  the  study  primary.  Schleier- 
macher  and  Paulus  anticipated  Strauss  in  the  name  and  concep- 
tion of  the  discipline.  But  it  was  Strauss  who  forced  the 
churches  to  take  the  matter  to  heart.  Upon  the  general  stir 
caused  by  Strauss,  Baur,  Christ.  Kirche,  V,  pp.  379-382,  and  the 
Studien  Kritiken  for  the  years  1835-1840. 

1  Zeller,  Strauss,  p.  41. 

2  Ullmann,  Historisrh  oder  Mythisch,  1838. 

•  Hermann  Weisse,  Evangelische  Geachichte,  1838. 


128      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Baur. 


The  divine 
without  the 
human  is 
nothing. 


criticism  has  become  a  less  literary,  a  more  vital, 
matter.  The  cry,  "to  the  sources,"  has  taken  a  far 
more  commanding  tone.^ 

The  philosophical  mood  dominated  the  higher 
thought  of  Germany  down  to  1830.^  Strauss,  passing 
over  from  that  mood  to  the  interpretation  of  the  New 
Testament,  carried  with  him  a  strong  metaphysical 
bias.  The  results  of  his  work  were  largely  negative. 
He  was  a  revolutionary,  not  a  constructive,  force. 

Baur  took  another  road.  His  mind  was  indeed 
metaphysical  in  its  bias,  and  his  interests  profoundly 
speculative.^  His  own  words,  "  Without  philosophy 
history  is  always,  for  me,  dead  and  dumb,"  make  a 
good  text  for  a  sketch  of  his  life.  Yet  he  differed 
broadly  from  Strauss.  While  philosophy  was  his 
inspiration  in  the  study  of  history,  none  the  less  his- 
tory was  his  end  and  aim.  He  was  far  more  construc- 
tive than  Strauss,  his  work  more  positive. 

From  Hegel's  view  of  the  divine  and  human  life  he 
drew  his  primary  principle.  He  believed  that  nothing 
can  have  value  for  man  or  permanent  significance  for 
the  historian,  unless  it  has  been  worked  out  into  life 
through  a  self-conscious,  human  process.  Like  his 
master,  he  despised  the  shallow  illuminism  of  the 


1  Weisse  and  Wilke  struck  out  about  the  same  time  the  Mark 
hypothesis,  which  has  since  won  so  much  favour  that  many 
of  our  contemporaries  take  it  as  a  finality.  Possibly  some  part 
of  this  air  of  finality  is  the  product  of  weariness.  Even  scholars 
may  be  affected  by  the  popular  hoiTor  of  mental  suspense. 

2  Hegel  died  in  1831.  Later,  Schelling  went  to  Berlin  to 
preach  a  philosophical  revival  (Hase,  KirchengescMchte.,  -S'  Th., 
2-=  abth.  (1892),  pp.  446-449).  But,  by  the  40's,  Germany's 
philosophical  mood  was  on  the  wane,  getting  ready  to  pass  into 
the  study  of  the  history  of  philosophy. 

3  Upon  the  periods  of  Baur's  activity  see  Realencyd. ; 
(1)  "Philosophy  of  Religion,"  (2)  "Biblical  Criticism," 
(3)  "Chtirch  History." 


THE  TURNING-POINT  129 

eighteenth  century,  which  had  no  eyes  save  for  the 
subjective  aspects  of  things.  The  human  is  nothing 
without  the  divine.  Illumination  without  revelation 
is  blind.  Thus,  the  idea  of  revelation  recovers  the 
dignity  and  honour  it  had  lost.  Yet  it  is  equally 
true  that  the  divine  is  nothing  to  us  without  the 
human.  Revelation  without  illumination  is  empty. 
Therefore,  it  is  not  enough  to  say  that  the  divine 
revelation  recorded  in  the  New  Testament  has  a 
human  aspect.  If  it  is  to  be  real  for  us,  it  must  be 
conceived  as  a  thorough  and  integral  human  move- 
ment. Neither  is  it  enough  to  say  that  revelation 
has  a  history.     It  is  a  history. 

Baur  did  not  look  upon  the  New  Testament  as  being  New  Testa- 
primarily  a  collection  of  books.  He  took  the  books  ment  buoks 
as  records  of  certain  stages  through  which  human  life  a  unity. 
and  thought  —  used  by  the  divine  life  and  mind  as 
organ  and  instrument  —  had  passed.  So  his  control- 
ling, coordinating  conception  was  practically  full- 
grown  before  he  began  his  critical  study.  At  least, 
it  was  so  far  ready  within  his  mind  that  a  very  little 
critical  work  sufficed  to  call  it  forth.  He  could  not 
take  up  the  New  Testament  literature  as  single  books. 
He  took  them  in  their  unity,  as  mentally  and  spiritu- 
ally related.  It  did  not  satisfy  him,  as  it  had  satisfied 
Eichhorn,  Schleiermacher,  and  De  Wette,  to  settle 
the  question  of  genuineness  either  for  or  against  this 
or  that  document.  Having  proved,  as  he  believed, 
that  St.  Paul  could  not  have  written  "  the  so-called 
Pastoral  Epistles,"  he  went  on  to  give  them  a  definite 
place  in  the  ecclesiastical  history  of  the  second  cen- 
tury, a  specific  function  in  the  mental  economy  of  the 
Catholic  Church.^ 

1  Die  aogenannte  Pastoralbriefe,  1835. 

"  Ich  wenigstens  vennas  nicht  einzusehen.  wie  die  Frage,  um 
welche  es  sich  hier  alleiu  handela  kanu,  .  .  .  anders  entschie- 

K 


130      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Baur's 
dogmatism. 


Jewish  and 
Pauline 
Cliristian- 
ity. 


Beyond  question,  Baur's  method  was,  to  a  consider- 
able degree,  dogmatic  and  high-handed.  He  was  not 
truly  critical.  He  did  not  first  empty  his  mind  of 
theory,  then  seek  patiently  for  the  facts ;  and,  when 
he  had  found  them,  determine  their  full  nature  and 
scope,  leaving  the  theory  to  ripen  in  the  sunshine  of 
assumed  results.  On  the  contrary,  he  had  a  philoso- 
phy of  the  New  Testament  history  nearly  complete 
within  the  first  ten  years  of  his  New  Testament  study. 
He  carried  a  sweeping  hypothesis  into  the  examination 
of  the  New  Testament. 

In  an  essay  upon  the  parties  in  the  Corinthian 
Church  ^  (1832),  he  had  brought  out  the  point  that  con- 
flict played  a  large  part  in  the  movements  of  the 
Apostolic  Church.  Herein  he  took  up  and  developed 
the  suggestion  of  Semler  and  Paul  us  regarding  the 
opposition  between  Jewish  and  Pauline  Christianity. 
He  thus  started  with  a  great  fact,  a  fact  that  put  to 
confusion  the  pious  notion  —  seventeen  hundred  years 
old  —  that  the  Apostolic  age  was  like  the  Saviour's 
garment,  free  from  seams,  a  paradise  of  high-tem- 
pered peace.  But  he  put  his  fact  into  the  hands  of 
the  Hegelian  formula  for  the  interpretation  of  history. 
Hegel  taught  that  all  human  development  begins  with 
a  primitive  synthesis  wherein  differences  lie  con- 
cealed, proceeds  to  an  analysis  wherein  differences  are 
brought  to  light,  and  ends  with  a  deeper  synthesis 


den  werden  kann,  als  dadurch,  dass  wir  sie  mit  den  mis  bekann- 
ten  Erscheinungen  innerhalb  des  ganzen  Zeitraums,  in  welchen 
die  Entstehung  dieser  Briefe  fallen  muss,  also  der  Geschichte 
der  beiden  ersten  Jahrhunderte,  zusammenstellen,"  Vorrede. 
"Das  Erste,  auf  was  es  bei  einer  kritischen  Frage  diese  Art 
ankommt,  ist  unstreitig  die  auf  bestimmte  Data  sich  stiitzende 
Totalanschmiung,^^  etc.  (the  italics  are  mine).    lb. 

1  "Die  Christus-partei  in  der  Corinthgemeinde,"  in  Tubinger 
Zeitschrift,  1832. 


THE  TURNING-POINT  131 

wherein  the  differences  are  unified.  Working  his 
data  by  the  aid  of  this  formula,  Baur  obtained  a  flow- 
ing outline  of  historical  connection  for  all  the  New 
Testament  books.     Nothing  was  left  at  loose  ends. 

The  unity  that  the  New  Testament  had  lost  between  Literary 
1750  and  1835  was  thus  regained.  The  dogmatic  con-  pface/dog- 
ception  of  the  Canon  put  each  document  in  its  place,  matic  unity. 
The  books  were  held  together  by  their  common 
inspiration,  their  divine  and  mystical  contents. 
When  the  dogmatic  conception  of  the  Canon  fell  into 
ruins,  or  serious  disrepair,  the  books  fell  apart.  They 
continued  to  be  treated  in  connection  with  one  another. 
But  the  reason  for  it  was  external  rather  than  internal. 
And  so  long  as  that  treatment  lasted,  the  Higher  Criti- 
cism failed  to  live  up  to  its  name.  The  "Lower" 
Criticism  busies  itself  with  the  Text.  The  "  Higher  " 
Criticism  undertakes  to  know  the  New  Testament 
literature  in  an  interior  way.  Baur  began  to  pay  in 
full  the  debt  thus  contracted.  The  New  Testament 
books  are  seen  to  be  closely  coherent.  They  consti- 
tute an  organism  of  thought  and  feeling.  They  have 
a  magnificent  human  unity,  through  which  the  divine 
unity  of  idea  manifests  itself. 

The  hypothesis  left  many  facts  out  in  the  cold. 
Many  others  it  put  on  the  rack.  It  did  violence  to 
the  nature  of  religion.  It  practically  banished  the 
supernatural.  It  was  almost  as  much  a  dogmatic  as 
it  was  a  critical  study.  Baur  was  indeed  one-sided: 
apparently,  God  never  uses  a  smooth  and  rounded 
man  to  give  a  new  turn  to  the  world's  thought.  Yet 
criticism  is  under  heavy  obligations  to  him.  We 
need  not  waste  time  in  asking  how  far  he  was  origi- 
nal, and  how  far  he  was  the  point  where  the  forces  of 
modern  life,  long  gathering  volume,  came  to  a  head. 
It  does  not  matter  whether  he  creatively  marked  out 
a  path  or  merely  represented  a  tendency.     One  thing 


132      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Baur  and 
Seoiler. 


Semler's 
treatment 
more  dog- 
matic. 


Summary. 


is  certain:  New  Testament  study,  since  his  time,  has 
had  a  different  colour. 

A  comparison  of  Baur  with  Semler  is  instructive. 
For  the  latter  was  the  pioneer  of  the  movement  from 
the  Lower  Criticism  into  the  Higher,  opening  the 
history  of  criticism  in  the  modern  sense.  And  the 
former  led  the  way  into  the  period  wherein  we 
ourselves  live. 

Semler,  as  we  have  seen,  anticipated,  in  a  vague 
fashion,  Baur's  starting-point,  by  distinguishing 
between  the  Jewish  and  Pauline  elements  of  the  New 
Testament.  But  he  did  not  reach  the  conclusion  by 
the  same  road.  Baur,  starting  with  a  study  of  the 
Corinthian  Church,  came  to  his  goal  by  way  of  inves- 
tigation. Semler,  a  typical  man  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  was  possessed  with  the  idea  of  an  antipathy 
between  the  spiritual  and  the  historical.  The  Judais- 
ing  elements  he  considered  accidental,  chaff  to  be 
separated  from  the  wheat  of  God's  pure  Word.  The 
ancient  conception  of  inspiration  still  controlled  him. 
Baur,  on  the  contrary,  took  the  Judaising  element  of 
the  New  Testament  to  be  an  organic  part  of  a  spiritual 
total,  a  stadium  through  which  Christianity  passed 
on  to  a  deeper  understanding  of  itself.  Semler's 
treatment  was  dogmatical ;  Baur's  was  historical. 

A  rough  but  serviceable  summary  of  the  mental 
movement  within  the  period  of  conscious  criticism 
runs  as  follows.  The  treaty  of  Westphalia  (1648) 
marks  the  end  of  the  religious  wars.  Indifference 
and  scepticism  were  now  the  order  of  the  day.  Deism 
became  the  bent  and  bias  of  the  educated  laity.  The 
traditional  theory  of  inspiration  dissolved,  and  the 
Sacred  Books  came  to  close  quarters  with  a  self-reliant 
reason  (1648-1750).  Thus,  the  free  study  of  the 
Canon  became  possible.  But  the  old  dogma  ruled 
men  from  its  burial  urn.     The  cardinal,  indeed  the 


THE  TURNING-POINT  133 

sole,  question  was  genuineness.  New  Testament  study- 
was  piecemeal  (1750-1835).  Finally,  a  great  idea, 
the  idea  of  Humanity,  laid  hold  of  society  with 
destructive  and  renovating  energy,  gave  a  new  birth 
to  poetry,  took  systematic  form  in  philosophy,  and 
invaded  the  field  of  New  Testament  study.  The 
Sacred  Books  were  treated  as  a  spiritual  total,  the 
product  of  and  the  witness  to  the  supreme  religious 
revolution  of  history.  And  criticism,  having  been 
for  some  time  a  floating  conception,  became  a  clear 
ideal. ^ 

1  A  more  detailed  summary  of  the  stages  in  the  critical  move- 
ments from  1750  :  — 

(1)  The  ancient  theory  of  Inspiration  breaks  down,  leaving 
the  N.  T.  books  open  to  free  investigation.  Semler's  study  of 
the  Canon  is  the  type. 

(2)  The  question  of  genuineness  is  the  commanding  one. 
The  N.  T.  books  are  studied  a.s  individual  books.  Schleier- 
macher  on  1  Tim.  and  Luke's  gospel  (1817),  Bretschneider  on 
the  Fourth  Gospel,  Bleek  on  Hebrews  (1828),  are  fine  examples. 

(3)  The  sweeping  synthesis  of  Baur.  N.  T.  scholarship  takes 
a  different  colour,  in  some  respects  a  different  temper.  The 
"  totalanschauung "  becomes  the  order  of  the  day.  E.g. 
Schwegler,  Der  Montanisimis  (1841),  Vorwort,  p.  iii. 

Upon  the  general  literary  movement  of  Germany,  with  which 
the  critical  movement  is  in  touch,  Schlosser,  Gesch.  d.  Achtzehn- 
ten  Jahrh.  (1848),  VII,  1<=  Abth.,  pp.  1,  2  ;  Schmidt,  Gesch.  d. 
Deutschen  Literatur  seit  Lessing^s  Tod  (4«  Auf.,  1858),  III. 


CHAPTEK  VIII 


TENDENCIES  ^ 


The  crisis.  Steauss  and  Baur  brought  on  a  crisis.    Up  to  their 

time,  criticism  had  been  a  mental  drift  rather  than  a 
systematic  programme.  But,  after  1835,  an  organised 
body  of  critical  opinion  took  the  field.  In  self-con- 
fidence it  came  near  being  a  match  for  the  dogmas 
that  the  eighteenth  century  cast  off.  Within  the 
criticism  lived  and  worked  the  Hegelian  spirit,  a 
spirit  which,  in  all  its  forms,  had  a  grand  air  of 
finality,  and  which  gained,  rather  than  lost,  self- 
possession  when  it  passed  over  into  a  theory  of 
revelation. 

The  result  was  a  violent  precipitation.  A  new  sys- 
tem of  thought,  a  new  programme  of  interpretation,  if 
it  be  full  of  energy  and  the  power  of  appeal,  always 
works  in  that  way.  It  is  like  a  strong  book.  One  is 
bound  to  agree  strongly  or  to  differ  strongly.  Either 
way,  it  clears  the  reader's  head.  Strenuous  approval 
or  strenuous  resistance  causes  the  perceptions  that 
were  previously  vague  to  take  shape  and  point.  The 
reader  arrives  at  a  clearer  knowledge  of  himself. 
Even  so  with  an  authoritative  body  of  critical  opinion, 

1  Literature :  Pfleiderer,  Development  of  Theology,  Bk.  3, 
ch.  1 ;  Watkiiis,  The  Fourth  Gospel  (Bampton  Lectures,  1890), 
Lect.  5  ;  Lichtenberger,  Hist,  of  German  Theology  in  the  Nine- 
teenth Century,  tr.  1889  ;  Hase,  Eirchengeschichte,  S"'  Th.,  2«  Abth. 
(1892);  Zenos,  The  Elements  of  the  Higher  Criticism  (1889), 
cbs.  9  and  11. 

134 


TENDENCIES 


185 


and  state 
of  religion 
in  Germany. 


such  as  that  which  followed  1835.  Floating  ideas 
precipitated  themselves.  Uneasy  impressions  hard- 
ened into  convictions.  Old  views  came  forward  with 
impassioned  protest.  New  views  took  the  air  with 
prodigious  self-enjoyment.  Popular  feeling  was 
called  in  to  settle  academic  questions.  The  man  of 
the  chair,  stiffening  under  opposition,  held  his  own 
opinions  with  deepening  seriousness.  Tendencies 
defined  themselves.     Men  found  their  bearings.^ 

An  enemy  of  the  Higher  Criticism  might  use  the  Criticism 
present  state  of  religion  in  Germany  as  an  indictment 
drawn  up  by  history  against  the  critical  process. 
Here,  he  would  truly  say,  is  the  home  and  hearth  of 
criticism.  And  here,  he  would  go  on  to  say,  religion 
is  at  a  lower  ebb  than  in  any  other  Protestant  country. 
In  the  university  towns  the  academic  body  is  largely 
hostile  and  indifferent.  Amongst  the  people  positive 
religion  has  a  feeble  hold.  And  this  is  the  direct  con- 
sequence of  unrestrained,  unbridled  criticism.  It  has 
dried  up  the  springs  of  religious  devotion.  It  has 
dragged  religious  reverence  from  its  old  place  of  van- 
tage. It  has  undermined  religious  habits.  Opinion 
about  the  Bible  is  eager,  fearless,  and  searching. 
And  the  Bible  itself  has  largely  lost  its  authority  and 
power  of  appeal. 

No  doubt,  there  is  some  truth  in  this  statement  of 
facts.  When,  however,  we  proceed  to  the  analysis  of 
causes,  great  caution  is  necessary.  Other  causes  for 
the  low  ebb  of  religion  in  Protestant  Germany  may 
easily  be  suggested.  One  of  them  is  the  history  of 
the  social  movement,   into  which  a  vast  amount  of 


1  There  is  a  fine  description  of  the  way  in  which  inilitarj-  con- 
flict hardens  and  defines  opinions  in  Moses  CoitTjier's  Literary 
Histoi-y  of  the  American  Revolution,  1897,  Vol.  I,  opening 
pages.  What  he  says  holds  true  in  greater  or  less  degree  of 
every  severe  crisis. 


136      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

earnest  thought  and  popular  enthusiasm  has  gone. 
Nowhere  else,  save  in  France,  has  socialism  come  near 
being  a  religion  in  itself.  And  in  France,  the  con- 
tinuous existence  and  prestige  of  the  Roman  hierarchy 
on  the  one  hand,  the  successive  political  revolutions 
on  the  other,  have  changed  and  deflected  the  current 
of  social  feeling.  In  Germany  socialism  has  been,  in 
effect,  a  religion.  The  political  power  being  continu- 
ous and  unimpaired,  and  the  Church  being  so  closely 
identified  with  the  State  that  its  pastors  and  teachers 
have  been  almost  invariably  hand  in  glove  with  the 
authorities,  it  has  come  to  pass  that  Christianity  is 
identified  with  opposition  and  indifference  to  the 
popular  ideals. 

Other  causes  lie  close  at  hand.  But  no  one  of  them 
concerns  us,  nor  all  of  them  together.  A  sober- 
minded  Christian  is  not  prone  to  think  that  he  can 
see  far  into  the  mystery  of  the  single  soul.  Still  less 
will  he  presume  to  look  deep  into  the  mystery  of  a 
great  nation's  spiritual  experience  and  say  why  one 
seed  has  grown  and  another  has  not.  He  knows  that, 
in  the  economy  of  the  Church  universal,  the  Chris- 
tians of  any  one  given  time  are  poor  judges  of  the 
deepest  consequences,  the  ultimate  results  of  a  great 
contemporary  movement.  What  God  may  have  in 
store  for  Germany,  what  new  treasures  of  religious 
experience  may  some  day  be  brought  to  light  in  the 
land  of  Luther  —  who  but  a  child  in  the  interpretation 
of  history  shall  undertake  to  decide  for  or  against? 
New  Testa-  The  whole  question  is  out  of  order.  We  are  con- 
historically^  cerned  with  a  certain  great  and  commanding  fact,  — 
the  story  of  tbe  way  in  which  the  New  Testament 
has  come  to  be  studied  and  valued  as  a  history,  — 
and  with  the  reconstruction  of  the  Christian  concep- 
tion of  revelation  which  that  study  involves.  We 
have  seen  how,  after  the  fifth  century,  the  Bible  was 


TENDENCIES  137 

taken  farther  and  farther  away  from  the  field  of  com- 
mon experience,  the  tiekl  where  the  layman's  heart, 
the  layman's  reason,  could  find  it  and  know  it  at  first- 
hand. The  keys  of  the  deeper  knowledge  of  the  Bible 
were  put  into  the  hands  of  the  monk  and  the  Pope. 
The  religious  consciousness  could  not  see  the  Word  of 
God  as  it  is  in  itself.  Men  must  needs  pass  through 
Tradition  in  order  to  reach  the  sacred  text;  and,  by 
the  time  they  reached  it,  their  minds  were  so  tilled 
with  the  Church's  dogmas  that  they  could  not  perceive 
the  plainest  and  most  outstanding  objects. 

If  anything  in  the  history  of  our  religion  is  certain,  Free  study 
this  is  certain ;  namely,  that  it  is  necessary  to  the  Scripture, 
true  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures,  to  the  deep 
appreciation  of  God's  Word,  that  Christians  should  go 
behind  Tradition,  should  see  the  Sacred  Books  just  as 
they  were  when  they  grew  up  within  their  time  and 
place.  If  God  has  not  willed  that  this  should  come 
to  pass,  then  He  has  willed  nothing.  The  establish- 
ment of  the  Catholic  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire 
was  certainly  ordained  by  God.  The  free  and  fear- 
less study  of  Holy  Scripture  was  no  less  ordained  by 
Him.  Indeed,  the  one  divine  act  drew  the  other  after 
it.  For  the  establishment  of  the  Church  involved  the 
canonisation  of  the  Scriptures.  Their  canonisation 
exalted  their  value  far  above  all  other  literature.  And 
this  exaltation  made  criticism  inevitable. 

Great  events  need  long  periods  to  bring  their  deeper  Germany's 
consequences  to  light.  We  must  not  presume  to  make 
our  ignorance  and  our  fears  judges  of  the  final  result 
of  the  great  work  in  which  Germany  has  been  the 
pioneer  and  leader.  It  is  enough  for  us,  who  live  only 
in  the  present  and  can  see  but  parts  of  God's  mean- 
ing and  purposes,  —  it  is  enough  for  us  to  know  that 
not  without  the  divine  will  did  Germany  come  to  her 
task.     Not  for  Germany  alone,  but  for  the  world,  has 


work  for 
the  world. 


138      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


No  purely 
critical 
process  is 
possible. 


Criticism 
not  a  body 
of  opinions. 


the  work  been  done.  No  doubt  Germany  lias  suffered 
loss.  Apparently,  no  great  thing  can  ever  come  to 
pass  unless  some  damage  attends  it.  But  the  loss  in 
this  case  has  brought  a  harvest.  If  Germany  has 
undergone  a  decline  in  practical  religion,  her  main 
work  has  been  well  done.  God  assigns  specific  duties 
to  nations  as  to  individuals.  Can  we  doubt,  when 
once  we  have  followed  the  course  of  criticism,  can  we 
doubt  that  the  Master  of  men  assigned  to  Germany 
the  duty  of  free  Bible-study?  And  if  He  has,  it  is 
not  our  business  to  balance  the  books  of  universal  his- 
tory. Taking  things  as  we  find  them,  we  must  believe 
that  Germany's  gain  and  loss  have  been  for  the  whole 
Church,  to  the  end  that  the  Word  of  God  might  be 
unbound.  If  she  has  suffered,  then  her  sufferings, 
like  the  burning  bodies  of  Latimer  and  Ridley,  have 
kindled  a  fiame  that  cannot  be  put  out. 

It  resulted,  from  the  work  of  Strauss  and  Baur, 
that  criticism  became  a  constructive  principle,  a  defi- 
nite programme.  In  a  certain  sense,  it  even  became 
an  illusion.  There  has  existed,  these  past  sixty  years, 
a  party  of  critics  who  have  borne  themselves  as  if 
there  were  some  such  thing  as  a  purely  critical  pro- 
cess, and  as  if  they  were  its  representatives.  In  truth, 
there  is  no  such  thing  as  an  absolutely  pure  critical 
process.  And  the  idolatrous  estimate  of  the  imaginary 
standard  of  criticism  is  just  another  chapter  in  the 
long  history  of  the  reign  of  words,  another  divorce 
between  words  and  things. 

We  have  learned  that  the  causes  which  set  criticism 
on  foot  were  many  in  number  and  diverse  in  nature; 
and  that  the  men  of  the  chair  unduly  exalt  them- 
selves, if  they  suppose  that  the  free  study  of  the  Bible 
is  a  business  which  academic  processes  alone  have 
created,  and  which  academic  processes,  by  themselves, 
maintain.     The  critics  are  part  of  a  great  stream  of 


TENDENCIES 


139 


interest  and  prejudice  and  passion.  Criticism  is  a 
method,  not  a  body  of  opinion.  With  it,  as  with 
science,  the  stake  is  not  a  certain  conclusion,  a  par- 
ticular set  of  truths,  but  truthfulness,  the  impassioned 
desire  to  find  the  original  facts  of  sacred  history. 
Now,  dogmatic  interest  and  points  of  view  have  been 
at  work  on  all  sides.  The  story  of  the  purely  dispas- 
sioned  critic  is  another  edition  of  Robinson  Crusoe. 
And  the  ideal  critic  himself  is  not  a  fact,  but  a 
personification. 

If  the  conceit  of  a  purely  critical  process  be  kept  Criticism 
up,  it  creates  a  new  kind  of  orthodoxy.  By  the  power  *°  ^^®*^- 
of  the  keys  which  it  confers,  critics  of  this  impossible 
class  make  bold  to  bind  and  loose.  They  put  outside 
the  critical  pale  those  who  retain  any  part  of  the 
supernatural  interpretation  of  the  origins  of  Chris- 
tianity.^ Criticism,  however,  is  an  ideal,  not  an 
accomplished  fact.  To  identify  it  with  any  particular 
attitude  toward  any  alleged  fact  is  an  act  of  usurpa- 
tion. To  get  at  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  noth- 
ing but  the  truth,  is  the  aim.  To  surrender  all  present 
views  and  connections,  if  they  put  themselves  in  the 
way  of  the  search  for  truth,  is  the  obligation.  But, 
surely,  it  is  at  least  conceivable  that  a  mind  strongly 
conservative  might  be  more  truly  critical  than  the 
most  radical  critic,  might  have  a  holier  desire  to  get 
at  the  whole  body  of  facts  recorded  in  the  Scriptures. 
Nothing  is  to  be  gained  by  calling  names  or  claiming 
titles. 

Facts  that  come  from  a  world  outside  our  deepest 
interests  can  be  weighed  without  passion.    Facts  that 


1  E.g.  Holzmann's  treatment  of  Weiss  and  Beyschlag,  Einlei- 
tung,  199.  lie  assigns  them  to  the  "  Dogniatisch  Restauration  " 
as  distinguished  from  the  •'  Wisseuschaftliche  Opposition."  It 
requires  a  considerable  dash  of  infallibility  to  draw  the  "  scien- 
tific" line  across  the  field  of  N.  T.  study  in  that  fashion. 


Entirely 
dispassion- 
ate criticism 
an  impossi- 
bility. 


140      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

have  little  intrinsic  weight  may  be  assessed  with  a 
cool  head.  But  Christianity  is  a  fact  at  the  very 
centre  of  Occidental  history  and  as  deep  as  life.  It 
is  not  possible  that  the  critic  shall  have  an  absolutely 
cool  head,  shall  be  altogether  dispassioned.  On  all 
sides,  deep  feeling  for  or  against  some  of  the  inherited 
beliefs  of  our  religion  is  inevitable. 

To  organised  Christianity,  Strauss  and  Baur  gave 
so  grievous  a  wound  that  the  most  strenuous  resistance 
followed.  Christ  is  the  estate  and  the  endowment  of 
Christianity.  Our  faith  stands  or  falls  with  the  person 
of  its  founder.  From  the  beginning,  it  has  built  its 
claims  to  spiritual  dominion  upon  the  fact  that  in  him 
deity  and  humanity  fully  met  together.  The  rational- 
ism of  the  eighteenth  century  reduced  the  super- 
natural events  of  the  Gospels  to  purely  natural 
occurrences.  The  philosophical  criticism  that  came 
on  the  field  in  1835  reduced  them  to  symbolical,  or 
representative,  expressions  of  universal  ideas.  There 
were  deep  differences  between  Strauss  and  Baur.  But 
their  Christology  had  one  fundamental  quality  in 
common :  they  translated  the  fact  of  the  Incarnation, 
as  Christians  had  understood  it,  into  a  personified 
idea. 
General  That  an  interpretation  like  this  should  be  widely 

forces?  ^^  easily  accepted  on  the  spur  of  the  moment,  was  out 

of  the  question.  The  critics  who  even  dreamed  of  it 
—  if  any  such  there  were  —  stood  on  the  mental  level 
of  the  men  of  the  French  Revolution  who  started  a 
new  calendar  in  1792.  Humanity  has  invested  a  vast 
amount  of  spiritual  capital  in  the  institutes  of  Chris- 
tianity. The  Church  is  so  great  a  body,  her  roots  are 
so  deep  in  history,  that  she  cannot  easily  be  changed. 
In  the  nature  of  things,  criticism  of  the  kind  that  got 
vogue  through  Strauss  and  Baur,  was  the  signal  for  a 
general  rally  of  the  forces  of  Protestant  Germany. 


TENDENCIES 


141 


The  very  standing-ground  of  Christianity  seemed 
to  be  endangered.  And  when  Baur's  younger  fol- 
lowers began  to  cut  and  slash  the  New  Testament,  it 
was  as  if  a  man  should  see  the  body  of  his  dearest 
friend  under  the  knife  of  a  promising,  but  rough- 
handed,  medical  student.  German  Christianity  had 
been  shut  in  by  God  to  the  work  of  criticism.  The 
task  could  not  be  avoided.  The  original  text  of 
revealed  truth,  the  original  elements  of  Scripture, 
must  be  seen  in  their  native  features  and  dress.  But 
Christendom  could  not  accept  a  dogmatic  limitation 
of  the  scope  and  contents  of  the  things  that  underpin 
and  support  it.  The  facts,  and  nothing  but  the 
facts,  must  be  found  and  laid  bare,  no  matter  what 
befell  the  vested  interests  of  the  churches.  What 
the  facts  were,  however,  in  their  whole  scope  and 
content,  Baur  and  his  followers  could  not  be  permitted 
to  judge  beforehand. 

The  challenge  "  To  the  sources!  "  must  be  accepted. 
The  only  alternative  was  to  go  back  to  the  sheltering 
arms  of  Tradition  —  in  other  words,  to  enter  the 
Roman  Communion.  And,  in  fact,  a  movement  in 
that  direction  set  in.^  But  it  amounted  to  little.  All 
the  conditions  that  have  given  to  Germany  her  intel- 
lectual leadership  in  the  nineteenth  century  must  be 
taken  back  before  it  could  come  to  much.  Protes- 
tantism was  hedged  in.  The  work  of  subjecting  the 
Sacred  Books  to  a  searching  examination  was  a  divine 
and  nevitable  work.  It  did  not  follow,  though,  that 
the  faith  of  Christendom  in  the  supernatural  elements 

1  The  "Komantic"  movement  (Haym,  Die  roinantische 
Schule,  1870).  Against  "  common  sense  "  it  exalted  imagination 
and  fancy.  Against  the  eighteenth-century  love  of  clearness  it 
praised  tlie  mystical  and  the  mysterious.  And  against  the  self- 
worship  of  the  present  and  future  it  magnified  the  past.  See 
also  Omond,  The  Romantic  Triumph,  1900. 


Defence 
of  the  su- 
pernatural 
elements  in 
the  New 
Testament. 


142      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


1835-1850. 


Central 
points  of 
critical 
opinion. 


of  the  New  Testament  was  to  be  thrown  overboard. 
On  the  contrary,  they  were  sure  to  be  strenuously 
defended. 

Everything  combined  to  make  the  30's  and  40's 
a  time  of  profound  agitation.^  German  Christian- 
ity was  stirred  to  the  depths.  On  the  one  side,  the 
old  conception  of  the  Bible,  the  old  ideas  of  in- 
spiration, the  traditional  methods  of  interpretation, 
reasserted  themselves.  On  the  other,  the  bold  ideas, 
the  aggressive  methods,  the  sweeping  claims  of  the 
new  time  let  loose  upon  the  old  views  a  war  that  knew 
no  quarter.  Between  these  contending  forces  a  great 
body  of  conservative  Christian  scholars,  who  believed 
that  there  could  be  no  permanent  conflict  between  the 
ideals  of  reason  and  the  ideals  of  Scripture,  sought  to 
mediate. 

Two  main  points,  kept  carefully  in  mind,  may 
enable  us  to  get  a  clear  view  of  the  central  elements 
in  the  masses  of  critical  opinion  that  deployed  on  the 
field  of  New  Testament  study.  One  is  given  to  us 
by  Baur's  interpretation  of  Apostolic  history.  He 
thought  that  Christianity  started  on  its  career  as  a 
Jewish  sect.^    Out  of  this  provincial  condition  it  was 


1  Political  agitation.  The  Revolution  of  1830  in  France  and 
the  sympathetic  movements  in  other  countries  ;  the  beginnings 
of  the  socialistic  movement  which  have  so  deeply  affected  the 
inner  life  of  Germany.  The  growing  prestige  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  in  Germany  ;  Mohler's  Sijmholik  (1832)  was 
the  herald  of  it  (Baur,  Christ.  Kirche,  V,  pp.  309-.320).  The 
promulgation  of  the  dogma  of  the  Immaculate  Conception  of 
Mary  (1854)  betokened  the  deepened  self-consciousness  of  the 
Papacy.  Baur  says  truly  regarding  the  general  spirit  of  the 
time,  "  Charakter  der  neuesten  Zeit,  deren  Tendenz  es  ist,  die 
principiellen  Gegensatze  so  viel  moglich  zu  scharfen"  (p.  309). 

2  One  shrinks  from  so  brief  a  description  of  a  great  scholar's 
views.  To  be  absolutely  clear  one  must  leave  out  all  colour  and 
atmosphere,  and  so  become  somewhat  unfair.     It  is  true  that 


TENDENCIES  143 

delivered  by  Paul.  A  bitter  warfare  between  Jew- 
ish Clii-istianity  and  Paulinism  ensued.  Finally,  a 
Catliolic  Christianity,  the  Catholic  Churcli  and  Canon, 
resulted  from  a  deliberate  compromise  between  the 
hostile  parties.  Within  tliis  framework  Baur  placed 
the  New  Testament  literature.  He  found  everywhere 
a  tendency,  a  distinct  dogmatic  aim.  And,  in  each 
case,  the  aim  was  defined  by  the  relation  of  the  indi- 
vidual author  to  the  fundamental  opposition  between 
the  original  apostles  and  Faul.^ 

It  is  true  that  Baur's  contribution  to  New  Testa- 
ment study  would  be  most  unfairly  judged,  if  we 
summed  it  all  up  under  this  liypothesis.-  His  main 
work  was  positive  and  permanent.  He  set  the  example 
of  treating  the  New  Testament  as  an  organic  whole,  a 
living  body  of  literature  to  be  understood  only  in  con- 
nection with  the  turns  and  crises  of  an  historical 
movement.  He  was  the  first  to  overcome  the  effects 
of  the  traditional,  dogmatic  conception  of  the  Canon. 

the  "tendency"  theory  concerning  the  origin  of  our  N.  T. 
books  was,  for  controversial  purposes,  the  literary  nerve  of 
Baur's  interpretation.  Each  book  was  assigned  its  position  in 
time  and  space  by  reason  of  tlie  conscious  relation  of  its  autlior 
to  the  supposed  mortal  conflict  between  the  two  wings  of  Apos- 
tolic Christianity.  This  was  the  salient  point.  Here  the  antithe- 
sis to  the  traditional  view  of  the  Canon  massed  its  forces. 
Here,  too,  the  idea  of  humanity  took  possession  of  the  field  and 
revolutionised  the  literary  treatment  of  the  N.  T.  Hence,  in  a 
brief  history,  it  must  needs  have  a  practical  monopoly  of  atten- 
tion. But  Baur's  view  of  the  first  and  second  centuries  w;is  too 
large  to  be  exhausted  by  a  single  hypothesis,  however  prominent 
it  might  be.  His  grasp  of  the  period  was  wide  and  strong.  His 
scholarship  was  prodigiously  fertile.  And  not  one  of  his  many 
books  was  barren.  For  all  his  one-sidedness,  he  remains  the 
greatest  N.  T.  scholar  within  the  past  one  hundred  and  fifty  years. 

1  Baur,  Church  History,  tr.  1878.  One  of  the  finest  pieces 
of  modern  historical  writing. 

2  Jtilicher,  Einleitung  i.  d.  N.  T.,  2«  Aufl.,  1894,  p.  11. 


144     HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


But  this  part  of  his  work  was  appropriated  by  every- 
body. It  was  a  common  gain.  No  one  could  put  a 
private  mark  upon  it.  In  this  affair  Baur  represented 
and  expressed  the  permanent  mood  of  criticism. 
Consequently,  we  cannot  use  the  attitude  of  scholars 
toward  this  conception  as  a  guide  to  classification. 

The  more  strictly  individual  element  in  Baur's  con- 
struction is  the  hypothesis  of  a  mortal  antipathy 
between  St.  Paul  and  the  Twelve.  And  this  will 
serve  us  well  as  a  clew  through  the  maze.  The 
changing  attitude  of  scholars  toward  this  "  tendency  " 
theory  gives  us  a  fair  indication  of  the  degree  to  which 
the  historical  character  of  the  New  Testament  has 
commended  and  approved  itself  to  scholars  since  1835. 
And  seeing  that  our  subject  is  the  history  of  the  way 
in  which  the  New  Testament  has  come  to  be  inter- 
preted as  a  history,  we  shall  thus  keep  ourselves  close 
to  the  subject  in  hand,  while  fitting  ourselves  to 
estimate  the  assured  gains  of  criticism. 

The  other  point  to  guide  ourselves  by  is  the  person- 
ality of  Jesus.  "What  think  ye  of  Christ?"  is  the 
supreme  question  not  only  for  the  outsider  who  is 
looking  toward  the  Church,  but  for  the  Church  her- 
self. Down  to  the  eighteenth  century,  nobody  doubted 
that  Christ  created  Christianity.  Christendom  be- 
lieved the  Gospels  to  be  solidly  and  literally  his- 
torical. No  one  saAV  in  them  the  work  of  the  "  later 
hand,"  or  discovered  the  intrusion  of  evangelical 
legend  and  comment.  Yet  the  Church,  by  her  way  of 
putting  the  supreme  question,  obscured  both  our 
Lord's  humanity  and  the  historical  character  of  the 
books  that  attested  his  being  and  work,  overlaying 
both  with  a  thick  deposit  of  dogma.  The  result  was 
that,  while  the  absolute  historicity  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment was  assumed,  the  real  answer  was  sought  in  the 
region  of  speculation,  not  in  the  field  of  Bible-study. 


TENDENCIES 


145 


Strauss  and  Baur  forced  the  Christian  reason  to  put 
the  question  aright.  We  must  go  back  of  the  great 
theological  debate  of  the  Nicene  period.  We  must 
settle  our  accounts  with  the  doubts  touching  the  his- 
torical being  and  work  of  the  Saviour.  We  must 
know  him  as  he  was  on  the  earth,  in  his  own  words 
and  deeds  and  suiferings.  The  historical  Christ  is 
the  foundation  of  Christian  theology.  He  must  also 
be  its  touchstone. 

This  brings  us  to  a  point  whence  we  may  see  that  it 
is  impossible  to  separate  the  critical  from  the  theo- 
logical movement.  Back  in  the  30's  and  40's  there 
came  a  crisis  in  New  Testament  study.  A  little  later, 
with  the  Neo-Kantian  and  Ritschlian  developments, 
came  an  acute  crisis  in  the  history  of  theology.  The 
two  are  parts  of  a  common  movement.  This  may 
serve  to  remind  us  once  more  of  the  cardinal  fact  that 
we  are  dealing  with  a  history  wherein  ''critical" 
motives  and  "dogmatic"  motives  are  inextricably 
mingled.  It  may  also  help  to  press  upon  us  the 
conviction  that  we  should  not  expect  to  see  deeply 
or  clearly  into  a  history  of  which  we  ourselves  are  so 
completely  a  part,  and  that  we  must  leave  to  another 
age  the  task  of  passing  a  valuable  and  abiding  judg- 
ment upon  our  own. 

The  crisis  brought  out  the  full  force  and  thought 
of  Germany.  Individual  influences  formed  schools  of 
opinion.  But  deeper  than  these  individual  influences 
were  the  tendencies  that  sprang  from  the  life  of  Chris- 
tendom on  the  one  hand,  and  the  life  of  the  age  on  the 
other.  The  tendencies  are  more  significant  than 
the  schools.  The  latter  stand  for  the  common  motives, 
the  deliberate  programmes  of  small  bodies  of  scholars. 
For  the  most  part,  they  are  made  by  the  tendencies. 
For  no  single  scholar,  however  great  and  consecrated, 
and  no  set  of  scholars,  liowever  eager  and  devoted, 


The  critical 
and  the 
theological 
movements. 


Tendencies 
more  signifi- 
cant than 
schools. 


146      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

can  do  more  than  give  a  slight  change  of  direction  to 
the  historical  causes  that  issue  from  the  collective  and 
continuous  life  of  the  Christian  world.  Only  in  part 
were  the  schools  the  places  where  men  made  up  their 
minds.  Far  more  were  they  the  places  where  men 
took  observations,  getting  their  bearings,  and  estimat- 
ing the  forces  at  work  in  the  seething,  tumultuous  life 
about  them. 

Naturally,  there  were  two  main  currents  of  feel- 
ing. One  of  them  came  from  the  large  and  deepening 
experience  of  modern  times.  Since  the  break-up  of 
the  mediaeval  world  man  has  made  two  great  dis- 
coveries, —  the  universe  and  his  own  past.  Nature 
and  history  have  come  upon  reason  with  overpower- 
ing majesty.  The  thought  of  the  Greeks  was  chiefly 
philosophical.  The  thought  of  the  Nicene  Age  was 
almost  wholly  theological.  But  the  thought  of  our 
day  is  more  and  more  exclusively  scientific.  This 
is  profoundly  true  even  of  Germany,  where  the  one 
impressive  philosophical  movement  of  modern  times 
ran  its  course.  Philosophy  was  a  temporary,  though 
a  consuming,  occupation  of  reason.  It  was  speedily 
followed  by  a  passion  for  the  study  of  nature  and 
history.  Trendelenburg  said  that,  in  consequence  of 
the  Hegelian  riot  of  metaphysics,  Germany  was  like  a 
man  who,  having  drunk  hard  and  long,  waked  out  of 
his  stupor  with  a  splitting  headache  and  feeling 
strongly  disposed  to  take  the  pledge.^ 

Compte's  famous  summary  of  the  stages  in  experi- 
ence is  known  to  all.  Man  begins  his  interpretation 
of  his  life  and  his  world  with  theology,  grows  into 
metaphysics,  and  comes  to  maturity  in  science.  Taken 
as  Compte  meant  it  should  be  taken,  — as  the  philoso- 
phy of  history  in  a  nutshell,  —  it  is  easy  to  find  flaws 


Trendelenburg,  Logische  Untersuchungen,  2^  ed. ,  Vorwort. 


TENDENCIES 


147 


in  it.  On  the  historical  side,  exceptions  can  be  found 
with  little  difficulty.  On  the  logical  side,  it  is  pos- 
sible to  show  that  the  scientific  stage  of  experience 
must  give  rise,  sooner  or  later,  to  the  old  questions. 
But  taken  as  a  mental  sign  of  the  times,  it  is  the  most 
instructive  generalisation  of  our  century.  For  the 
intellectual  mood  and  temper  of  our  epoch  is  scientific 
beyond  question.  And  equally  beyond  question  this 
mood  is  bound  to  strengthen  rather  than  weaken. 
For  it  is  the  mood  begotten  and  fostered  by  the  press- 
ure on  the  mind  of  a  vast  body  of  unmeasured  and 
unexplored  facts.  In  the  presence  of  the  freshly  dis- 
covered universe,  and  of  all  the  matter  included 
within  the  history  of  the  human  past,  the  scientific 
attitude  is  inevitable.  The  highest  mental  virtue  of 
our  time  consists  in  the  careful  measurement  of 
facts,  in  systematic  experiment,  and  in  a  strong  and 
unsleeping  suspicion  of  dogmatic  statements. 

Now  the  Christian  consciousness  is  not  a  little  land   Bible-study 
of  Goshen,  whither  the  thought  and  feeling  of  the  fi?e  o"f  thl"^^ 
great  outside  world  does  not  come.     It  is  part  and  time, 
parcel  of  consciousness  at  large.     That  does  not  mean 
that  Christianity'  is  ruled  by  the  world.     The  Head 
and  Saviour  of  the  Church  has  established  his  throne 
in  the  hearts  of  his  people ;  he  rules  and  renews  them 
by  influence  from  on  high.     But  the  Christian  con- 
sciousness is  in  the  world.     Bible-study,  then,  cannot 
be  a  department  of  knowledge  set  off  by  itself.     It 
must  needs  take  a  colour  and  bias  from  the  general 
thought  of  the  time.* 

The  centre  of  our  thought  is  the  noble  conception  of  idea  of  law. 
law.     And  it  has,  apparently,  a  strong  antipathy  for 

^  This  is  saying  nothing  about  modern  Christianity  which  can- 
not be  said  about  ancient  Christianity.  The  Nicene  Age  took 
its  mental  categories  and  methods  from  Greek  philosophy.  Our 
age  takes  them  from  the  scientific  study  of  nature  and  history. 


148      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

the  idea  of  the  supernatural.  The  supernatural  seems 
to  transgress  by  thrusting  into  history  something 
tha  refuses  to  relate  itself  to  what  goes  before,  thus 
making  real  history  impossible.^  Again,  it  seems  to 
offend  by  letting  down  from  above  something  that 
defies  the  law  of  cause  and  effect,  and  so  claims  the 
benefit  of  clergy  when  reason  lays  hands  upon  it,  to 
examine  and  judge  it.  On  both  counts,  the  super- 
natural seems  foreign  to  science  and  to  a  scientific 
interpretation  of  history. 
Application  That  Bible-study,  when  it  had  once  broken  with  Tra- 
study.  ^'  dition  and  had  carried  the  Sacred  Books  to  the  modern 
university  to  be  examined,  as  all  great  objects  are 
examined  when  they  would  have  themselves  taken 
seriously  by  modern  men;  that  Bible-study  should 
be  profoundly  affected  by  the  ruling  idea  of  law, 
was  a  matter  of  course.  If  it  were  not  childish  to 
balance  the  loss  and  gain  in  dealing  with  a.  matter  that 
involves  the  inevitable,  we  might  confidently  say  that 
the  results,  in  the  long  run,  are  good.  Just  as  our 
splendid  conception  of  law  provides  the  revelation  of 
God's  holy,  creative  Will  with  a  logical  apparatus 
proportional  to  its  greatness,  so  the  self-same  concep- 
tion renders  the  most  loyal  and  efficient  service  to  the 
study  of  revelation.  For,  as  the  Bible  defines  revela- 
tion, it  is  God's  gift  of  Himself  and  His  plan  of  sal- 
vation—  the  gift  of  saving  unity  and  cleansing  hopes  — 
conveyed  through  the  experience  of  men  who  met  God 
in  the  ways  of  the  common  life.  Revelation,  there- 
fore, not  only  has  a  history,  but  is  a  history.  And  since 
history  is  not  rational,  unless  by  law  every  part  is 
related  to  every  other  part,  it  follows  that  our  concep- 
tion of  law  is  the  logical  ally  for  which  the  Biblical 
idea  of  revelation  has  long  waited. 

1  Strauss,  tr.  1,  pp.  1-4. 


TENDENCIES 


149 


Nevertheless,  when  the  great  modern  conception  Criticism  of 
came  into  the  held  of  New  Testament  study,  it  brought  ^  ®  history, 
in  its  train  some  companions  of  questionable  origin 
and  standing.  An  overpowering  prepossession  against 
the  supernatural  came  with  it.  This  led  to  a  radical 
criticism  of  the  evangelical  history  as  distinguished 
from  a  criticism  of  the  sources.^  It  was  assumed,  as 
a  condition  of  New  Testament  study,  that  the  super- 
natural elements  in  the  life  of  our  Lord  were  unhis- 
torical.  Now  this  assumption  was  not  only  in  mental 
strife  with  the  devotional  mood  of  the  Church ;  it  was 
hostile  to  the  mood  of  judicial  criticism.  Christianity 
is  under  bonds  to  know  the  facts  touching  its  own 
origin  in  their  proper  shape,  their  pristine  colour. 
But  it  cannot  permit  a  so-called  criticism  to  determine 
beforehand  that  all  facts  of  a  certain  shape,  all  data 
of  a  certain  colour,  shall  be  condemned  by  a  drum- 
head trial.     This  is  not  criticism,  but  dogma, 

Strauss's  method  of  dealing  with  the  supernatural  Strauss  and 
was  an  advance  upon  that  of  the  pious  rationalism  na^ur^^'^' 
that  characterised  the  period  before  him.  Paulus  took 
the  Gospels  practically  in  block,  as  the  past  handed 
them  down  to  him.  He  then  proceeded  to  translate 
the  miraculous  elements  into  the  language  of  common 
sense.  The  supernatural  kept  its  standing  ground; 
the  sacred  text  was  undisturbed.  The  price  paid, 
however,  was  ruinous.  The  method  of  Paulus  was 
quite  as  vicious,  exegetically,  as  the  allegorical  sys- 
tem of  Origen.  It  violated  the  first  principles  of 
interpretation.  The  New  Testament  writers  were  not 
allowed  to  speak  their  own  language.  Far  better,  so 
far  as  the  interests  of  the  New  Testament  were  con- 

»  Schwartz,  Gesch.  d.  Theol.,pTp.  146, 147  ;  Ebrard,  The  Gos- 
pel History  (tr.  1876),  pp.  19-25  ;  Zeller,  Strauss,  p.  41  ("The 
criticism  .  .  .  was  not  a  criticism  of  the  Gospels,  but  of  the 
Gospel  story  "). 


150      HISTORY  OF  TEE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Conserv- 
ative 
tendency. 


Protestant- 
ism and 
Christ. 


cerned,  was  Strauss 's  frank  dissolution  of  the  super- 
natural into  the  legendary  and  mythical.  Hereby  the 
fundamental  principle  of  Protestantism  —  the  obliga- 
tion to  discover  the  original  text  of  the  Scriptures, 
the  facts  in  their  true  order,  the  thoughts  in  their  his- 
torical setting  —  was  resolutely  asserted.  The  Prot- 
estant Church  could  not,  without  self-stultification, 
reject  that  principle.  But  neither  could  she,  without 
self-destruction,  accept  the  dogmatic  rejection  of  the 
supernatural. 

The  other  main  tendency  was  the  conservative.  It 
was  not  as  strong  nor  as  well  intrenched  as  in  Eng- 
land. Had  it  been  so,  criticism  would  have  run  a  very 
different  course.  It  is  Germany's  freedom  of  thought 
and  self-reliance  of  scholarly  reason  that  has  made 
modern  Bible-study  possible.  And  these  qualities  do 
not  thrive  in  a  very  conservative  climate.  Yet,  even 
in  Germany,  the  conservative  forces  were  strong.  The 
Keformation  was,  first  of  all,  a  deed  of  the  heart,  an 
impassioned  insistence  upon  direct  contact  with  the 
Saviour.*  Afterward  it  became  a  process  of  reason, 
using  the  methods  of  the  New  Learning  in  order  to 
treat  the  Scriptures  historically.  Changed  as  were 
many  of  the  conditions  in  the  nineteenth  century,  this 
order  of  experience  still  held  good.  Criticism,  as 
an  act  of  scattered  individuals,  was  one  thing.  The 
acceptance  of  the  results  of  criticism  by  the  great 
body  of  Christians  was  another  thing.  The  critical 
process,  considered  at  large,  must  subserve  the  emo- 
tional and  spiritual  needs  of  the  Church. 

Protestantism,  from  the  very  first,  sought  to  com- 
mend itself  as  a  defence  of  the  honour  of  Christ.  The 
mediaeval  theory  of  tlie  priesthood  and  of  the  Mass 
had  tended  to  make  his  part  and  function    in   the 


Hagenbach,  Dogmengeschichte,  §  211. 


TENDENCIES  151 

economy  of  the  soxil  remote  and  passive.  The  medi- 
aeval theory  of  Tradition  had  done  injury  to  the 
sovereignty  of  his  book.  The  Keformation  was  a 
defence  of  his  rights  and  honour.  And  fidelity  to  the 
principles  of  the  Reformation  entailed  the  treatment 
of  the  New  Testament  as  a  human  literature;  for 
otherwise,  the  Saviour  himself  keeps  remote  from  the 
soul.  His  humanity  is  overcome  by  his  deity.  He 
still  remains  an  absentee  from  the  interior  affairs  of 
his  Church.  The  Pope  indeed  is  gone,  his  claims  as 
Vicar  of  Christ  thrown  into  bankruptcy.  But  into  his 
place  has  come  something  nearly  as  bad,  — a  body  of 
fixed  and  infallible  dogma.  The  Christ  does  not 
transact  his  business  with  the  soul  at  first-hand.  His 
honour  is  not  secure. 

The  New  Testament,  then,  must  be  humanised,  or  Legend  in 
all  is  lost.  And  when  once  it  is  humanised,  the  x^g^stament. 
abstract  possibility  of  developments,  of  conflicts  and 
changes  of  view,  of  the  growth  of  legend,  of  the  uncon- 
scious alteration  of  original  facts  and  colouring  of 
original  words,  must  be  frankly  conceded.  Other- 
wise, the  Sacred  Books  are  not  human  books.  And 
if  they  be  not  human,  then  the  Saviour  is  not  human, 
and  the  spirit  is  gone  out  of  religion.  But  Protestant- 
ism, for  all  that,  even  in  the  nineteenth  century,  is  a 
deed  of  the  heart  first,  and  afterward  a  deed  of  reason. 
The  Christian  consciousness  finds  in  the  Saviour  the 
transcendent  fact  of  the  spiritual  world.  Through  his 
humanity  it  touches  and  sees  the  full  being  of  deity. 
It  cannot,  therefore,  permit  the  critical  process  to 
decide  offhand  that  the  supernatural  elements  in  the 
story  of  Christ  are  unhistorical  aftergrowths.  For 
that  would  be  tantamount  to  an  admission  that 
humanity  in  its  perfection  must  keep  within  range  of 
humanity  on  its  average  level.  Dogma  shall  not  shut 
out  searching  criticism  from  the  New  Testament  in 


152      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


"Critical" 
and  "con- 
servative " 
not  exclu- 
sive of  each 
other. 


the  interest  of  orthodoxy.  But  no  more  shall  dogma 
of  another  sort  shut  up  our  conception  of  our  Lord's 
humanity  within  bounds  set  either  by  science  so-called 
or  philosophy  so-called.  There  shall  be  no  abstract 
criticism  of  the  history,  as  distinct  from  the  criticism 
of  the  sources. 

These  are  the  two  main  tendencies.  They  can- 
not be  fully  classified  by  the  terms  "critical"  and 
"conservative."  It  is  true  that  a  large  amount  of 
dogmatic  and  irrational  prejudice  went  into  the  con- 
servative resistance  to  the  free  examination  of  the 
New  Testament  literature.  Yet  it  is  also  true  that  a 
very  considerable  amount  of  dogmatic  prejudice  against 
the  supernatural  has  gone  along  with  the  freer  study 
of  tlie  Sacred  Books.  And,  without  stopping  to  weigh 
and  balance  the  one  prejudice  against  the  other,  it 
should  be  clear  that  the  word  "  critical "  is  too  broad 
a  term  to  be  monopolised  by  those  who,  whatever 
their  scholarly  merits,  have  completely  broken  with 
the  traditional  conception  of  Christ.  Any  form  of 
New  Testament  study  is  critical,  exactly  in  so  far  as 
it  admits  and  affirms  the  necessity  of  bringing  the 
intellectual  methods  of  our  time  to  bear  upon  the 
study  of  the  Bible.  That  is  the  only  test.  A  scholar 
need  not  be  uncritical,  even  if  he  has  a  very  positive 
faith  in  the  supernatural.  Neither  is  he  made  criti- 
cal by  the  most  positive  rejection  of  it.  We  are  con- 
cerned with  a  question  of  method,  not  with  one  or 
another  set  of  conclusions.  If,  then,  we  speak  of  the 
critical  and  the  conservative  tendencies,  we  must 
remember  that  our  words,  though  handy,  are  some- 
what inexact,  and  must  therefore  be  carefully  watched. 


CHAPTER  IX 


THE   SCHOOLS 


The  "schools"  must  be  handled.  And  yet  the 
treatment  is  not  likely  to  be  satisfactory.  *  In  the 
first  place,  they  are,  at  best,  imperfect  classifications. 
There  are  some  names,  of  weight  and  consequence, 
that  refuse  to  come  within  any  group.  In  the  second 
place,  the  groups  lack  in  permanence.  They  are,  at 
most,  camps  rather  than  schools  —  the  temporary 
meeting  grounds  of  men  who  are  more  or  less  of  one 
mind.  And  even  within  each  camp  there  are  consid- 
erable differences  of  opinion  and  shifting  relations. 
There  are,  then,  grounds  for  serious  dissatisfaction 
with  the  division  of  schools.  Still,  the  division  has 
its  uses,  particularly  in  a  handbook  whose  limits, 
forbidding  details,  demand  a  sketch  broadly  done. 

A  common  grouping  has  been  "critical,"  "tradi- 
tional," "mediating."  What  has  been  said  under  the 
head  of  "tendencies  "  is  enough  to  show  that  the  prin- 
ciple of  division  here  used  does  violence  to  a  true 
history  of  criticism.  We  cannot  permit  our  master- 
word  "critical"  to  be  monopolised.  Besides,  this 
grouping  has  been  done  by  men  who  would  have  little 

1  Literature  :  Zeller,  '-Die  Tubinger  historische  Schule  "  (in 
Vortdge,  I)  ;  Schaff,  Germany,  Us  Lbiiversities,  etc.  (1857); 
Life  of  Schleiermacher  (tr.  by  Rowan) ;  Albrecht  Eitschl,  by 
Otto  Ritschl  (2  vols.,  1892-1896). 

3  Holtzmann  considerably  modifies  it  {Einleitung,  pp.  186- 

207). 

153 


"Critical," 
"  tradi- 
tional," 
"  mediat- 
ing." 


154      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

or  nothing  to  do  with  the  supernatural.  In  itself  it 
is  no  less  unfair  than  groupings  made  by  men  on  the 
other  side  of  the  house.  For  example,  Godet  classi- 
fies New  Testament  scholars  by  their  theological  pro- 
clivities: they  are  "deistic"  or  "pantheistic"  or 
"  theistic."  ^  The  one  principle  of  classification  tacitly 
assumes  that  no  man  who  believes  in  the  supernatural 
can  be  truly  critical.  The  other  assumes  that  no  man 
who  rejects  the  supernatural  can  truly  account  for  the 
existence  and  character  of  the  New  Testament  books. 
Both  assumptions  are  out  of  place.  "  Criticism  "  is 
an  ideal  common  to  all  the  earnest  Bible-students  of 
our  time.  The  bond  that  unites  them  is  the  desire  to 
see  the  facts  and  ideas  of  Scripture  in  their  original 
order  and  connections.  Classifications,  which  per- 
petuate theological  and  philosophical  prejudices, 
though  they  may  contain  a  certain  truth,  are  a  hin- 
drance to  the  growth  of  mental  sanity  and  charity. 

The  simpler  the  classification  is,  the  nearer  the 
approach  to  a  bare  designation  of  groups  and  scholars 
without  any  attempt  at  description,  the  less  will  it 
offend.  To  say  little  is  sometimes  the  only  way  to 
say  anything.  We  shall,  therefore,  give  a  brief  sum- 
mary of  the  positions  taken  (1)  by  the  Tubingen 
School;  (2)  the  believers  in  the  correctness  of  the 
ancient  traditions  regarding  the  Sacred  Books;  (3) 
the  school  of  Schleiermacher ;  and  (4)  the  school  of 
Eitschl. 
Tiibingen.  The  Tiibingen  School  is  the  school  of  Baur.      It 

started  with  an  overpowering  emphasis  upon  the 
"  tendencies  "  in  the  New  Testament  literature.  The 
"tendency"  interpretation  becomes  historically  intel- 
ligible, if  we  set  it  against  the  conception  of  Scripture 
that  prevailed  from  the  fifth  to  the  eighteenth  cen- 

1  Godet,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T.  (tr.  1894),  pp.  57-60. 


THE  SCUOOLS  165 

tury.  According  to  this,  there  was  no  process  of 
human  opinion  in  the  New  Testament.  All  the  facts 
in  the  life  of  Christ  and  in  the  history  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Church  were  accepted  as  original  facts,  with 
no  element  of  legend  anywhere  about  them.  All  the 
differences  between  the  Gospels  were  taken  as  indi- 
vidual variations  of  a  divine  type,  each  variation  per- 
fect after  its  kind.  The  course  of  Apostolic  history 
was  absolutely  clear  and  fixed,  a  series  of  divine 
events,  as  little  dependent  upon  human  motives  and 
human  struggles  as  the  motions  of  the  stars.  Baur's 
interpretation  made  the  New  Testament  the  product 
of  human  thought  and  struggle.  The  primitive  facts 
of  Christ's  life,  the  early  years  of  Christianity,  were 
differently  valued,  according  to  the  point  of  view  of 
the  writer.  Each  author  had  a  "tendency,"  a  thesis 
to  be  established ;  and  he  used  the  data  to  prove  his 
point. 

The  truth  in  the  "tendency"  theory  has  become  a  "Ten-^^ 
common  gain  of  New  Testament  scholarship.  We  all  ^^^^' 
know  that  the  Gospels  were  not  written  as  scientific 
biographies.  They  do  not  aim  at  completeness. 
Their  narratives  are  sometimes  divergent.  Their 
reports  of  our  Lord's  words  are  sometimes  coloured  by 
the  feeling  of  a  later  day.  All  this  is  permanent 
ground.  But  in  Baur's  statement  of  it,  the  "ten- 
dency" theory  was  closely  akin,  in  its  effects,  to 
Strauss 's  mythical  theory.  The  Jewish  Christians 
shaped  and  coloured  the  facts  in  one  way.  The  Paul- 
inists  shaped  them  in  the  opposite  way.  The  Fusion- 
ists,  or  Catholics,  who  mediated  between  the  extremes, 
still  further  slurred  over  the  origins  of  Christianity, 
by  making  a  compromise  between  two  statements, 
each  of  which  was  largely  unhistorical.  Much  the 
greater  part  of  the  New  Testament  fails  us,  when  we 
ask  direct  questions  touching  the  early  situations  and 


156      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

events.  They  afford  us  capital  information  regarding 
the  moods  of  a  later  time.  But  when  we  ask  them 
regarding  the  early  times  into  which  they  project 
themselves,  the  information  is  indirect  and  secondary. 
Our  view  of  those  days  must  be  built  up  almost  wholly 
by  inference  and  hypothesis.-' 
Baur's  cash-  Two  main  results  followed.  The  first  was  the 
trad\dons.^^  wholesale  cashiering  of  the  superscriptions  of  the  New 
Testament  books.  Only  four  letters  of  Paul  and  the 
Apocalypse  retained  the  authorship  which  antiquity 
assigned  them.  The  latter  is  contemporary  with  the 
situations  it  describes,  from  the  standpoint  of  Jewish 
Christianity.  The  Epistles  to  the  Galatians,  the 
Corinthians,  and  Romans  are  contemporary  with  the 
movements  of  mind  and  life  which  they  record.  All 
the  other  New  Testament  books  come  from  times  later 
than  tradition  had  assigned  them.  They  give  us,  not 
history,  but  highly  coloured  interpretations  of  history. 
Person  of  The  second  result  was  that  the  person  of  Christ 

a  sma\/part  pla-J^d  a  part  but  little  greater  than  that  of  an  occa- 
sioning cause.  His  creative  relation  to  the  new 
religion  and  the  new  community  was  neg.lected, 
although  not  dogmatically  denied.  Baur  himself 
seemed  to  make  Paul  the  true  founder  of  Christianity 
as  we  know  it.  Some  of  his  disciples  went  beyond 
him  in  this  matter.  They  made  a  veritable  gulf 
between  Christianity  as  Jesus  conceived  it  and  lived 
it,  and  Christianity  as  Paul  preached  it.^ 

This  did  not  lie  in  Baur's  plan.  Neither  his  phi- 
losophy nor  his  scholarship  called  for  it.  On  the 
contrary,  his  Hegelian  philosophy  called  for  a  concep- 
tion of  Jesus  which  should  make  him  out  to  be  the 

1  Fisher,  Supernatural  Origin  of  Christianity ;  Holtzmann, 
Einleitung,  pp.  205,  206  ;  Bleek-Mangold,  Einleitung,  p.  31  ; 
Schwartz,  Gesch.  d.  Theol,  pp.  171-173. 

■^  Bleek-Mangold,  Einleitung,  p.  49. 


THE  scnooLS  157 

typical  man,  the  one  in  whom  the  universal  ideal  was 
hrst  realised.  And  liis  scholarship,  using  Paul  as  a 
vantage-ground  for  the  reconstruction  of  the  tradi- 
tional views  concerning  Apostolic  history,  would  have 
had  to  stand  Paul  on  his  head  in  order  to  avoid  giving 
a  true  spiritual  primacy  to  Jesus.  Baur's  earlier  view 
was  the  natural  one-sidedness  of  a  path-breaker.  At 
a  later  day  he  gave  larger  function  and  deeper  sig- 
nificance to  the  person  of  Christ.^  Yet  he  only  went 
far  enough  to  make  plain  the  gap  in  the  original 
theory.     He  did  not  bridge  it. 

Other  members  of  the  school  have  moderated  Baur's  Baur's 
principles  and  sobered  his  methods.  They  have,  for  ^[oderSed 
the  most  part,  abandoned  his  theory  that  Matthew  is 
the  earliest  Gospel,  taking  up  the  Mark  hypothesis, 
which,  since  Ebrard's  time,  has  come  to  be  accepted 
almost  as  a  finality. ^  Hilgenfeld,^  Holtzmann,* 
Weizsacker,*  Pfleiderer,^  have  practically  abandoned 
the  central  point  in  Baur's  position.  They  do  not 
shut  up  the  Twelve  within  a  narrow  "  Jewish  Chris- 
tianity," but  concede  to  them  a  real,  albeit  a  pro- 
vincial, catholicity.  Now,  this  is  equivalent  to  a 
surrender  of  a  fundamental  point  in  the  "  tendency  " 
hypothesis.  It  drew  after  it  the  recognition  that  ele- 
ments in  the  Gospels  and  in  the  Book  of  Acts,  which 
Baur  had  assessed  as  products  of  a  later  dogmatic 
mood,  are  a  genuine  part  of  the  primitive  history.  It 
also  entailed  a  material  shortening  of  the  time  required 

1  Vorlesungen  iiber  neutest.  Theologie  (1864),  pp.  75-121. 
In  his  earlier  tendency  to  exalt  Paul  at  the  cost  of  Christ,  Baur 
had  forerunners  (Reuss,  Hist,  of  X.  T.,  I,  pp.  53,  54). 

*  Hilgenfeld  is  the  only  considerable  scholar  who  has  held  on 
to  it.     Badham,  St.  Mark's  Indebtedness  to  St.  Matthew  (1897). 

«  Hilgenfeld,  Historisch-kritische  Einleitung  i.d.  iV.  T.  (1876). 

*  Iloltzmann,  Einleitung  i.  d.  X.   T.  (188(3). 

*  Weizsacker,  Apostolisches  Zeitalter,  2"  Auf.,  1892. 
<»  Otto  Pfleiderer,  Das  Urchristenthum  (1887). 


158      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

by  Baur  for  the  growth  of  the  New  Testament,  The 
larger  part  of  the  New  Testament  is  now  found  by 
most  scholars  within  the  bounds  of  the  first  century. 
Finally,  some  New  Testament  books  that  Baur  classi- 
fied as  ungenuine  have  been  accepted  as  genuine.  This 
goes  along  with  the  change  of  base  that  resulted  from 
the  surrender  of  the  original  position  of  the  school. 
If  primitive  Christianity  was  not  the  narrow  sect  Baur 
took  it  to  be,  and  if  the  Twelve  were  not  at  swords' 
points  with  Paul,  then  there  is  room  in  an  historical 
view  of  the  early  days  for  some  things  which  Baur  and 
his  disciples  excluded  from  it. 

Thus  the  march  of  Baur's  great  hypothesis,  being 
impeded  by  facts  which  it  overstrained  or  dragged 
along  against  their  will,  and  kept  under  the  steady 
fire  of  facts  which  stood  altogether  outside  the  hypothe-, 
sis,  was  slain  at  last  in  the  house  of  its  friends.  But 
not  until  it  had  done  what  an  hypothesis  is  designed 
to  do.  It  stirred  up  discussion,  inspired  interest,  and 
marked  out  the  main  lines  of  study. 
"Fragment-  On  the  side  of  method,  the  later  members  of  the 
school  became  less  sweeping.  Compared  with  Baur 
they  are  "fragmentists."^  This  is  due,  on  the  one 
hand,  to  the  decline  of  the  dogmatic  spirit  that  was 
so  characteristic  of  the  founder,  and,  on  the  other,  to 
the  recognition  of  the  essential  nature  of  a  religious 
revolution  like  that  recorded  by  the  New  Testament. 
It  involves  too  many  interests  of  human  nature,    it 

1  Harnack,  Chronologie  d.  altchrist.  Literatur  (1897),  pp. 
vii  and  ix.  Two  reasons  might  be  advanced.  (1)  The  growing 
prestige  of  science  with  the  resulting  suspicion  of  the  "  total- 
anschauung,"  of  sweeping  syntheses.  (2)  A  decline  in  the 
theological  passion  that  went  into  N.  T.  study  back  in  the  30's 
and  40's.  Whatever  the  cause,  the  result  is  not  altogether 
bad.  The  "  totalanschauung  "  is  a  good  servant,  but  a  poor 
master.  It  is  not  well  for  us  to  hear  the  grass  growing  in 
Palestine  nineteen  hundred  years  ago. 


ists. 


THE  SCHOOLS 


159 


necessitates  too  many  reconstructions  of  existing  con- 
ceptions, too  many  readjustments  of  existing  relations, 
it  is  altogether  too  many-sided,  to  be  taken  within  a 
sweeping  view.  This  intellectual  "  fragmentism  "  is 
a  welcome  thing.  The  great  constructive  principle, 
which  Baur  heralded,  has  done  its  full  work  in  the 
field  of  New  Testament  study.  What  is  now  needed 
is  patient  and  restrained  study  of  the  facts  in  detail.^ 

Protestantism,  at  its  birth,  received  the  traditional 
information  regarding  the  New  Testament  books  at  its 
face  value.  Down  to  1835  destructive  doubt,  while 
it  had  touched  and  troubled  this  body  of  real  or  sup- 
posed knowledge,  had  not  deeply  wounded  it.  But 
Baur  dealt  it  a  blow  that  seemed  mortal.  Hence  the 
conservative  forces  rallied  eagerly  to  its  defence. 

Conservatism  in  Germany  could  not  be  what  it  has   Conserv- 

been  in  England  and  America.     There  are  two  sub-   ^tism  m 
°  .  Germany. 

stantial  differences  in  the  situation.  In  England  to 
a  marked  degree,  in  America  to  a  considerable  degree, 
the  "  Church  "  idea  is  strong.  It  is  possible  for  men 
outside  as  well  as  inside  the  Koman  communion,  by 
leaning  heavily  with  one  arm  on  the  principle  of 
authority,  to  get  the  other  arm  free  for  direct  Bible- 
study.'^     Whether  this  is  a  legitimate  process  or  no, 

^  In  the  matter  of  sweeping  synthesis,  Baur's  mantle  has 
fallen  upon  the  Dutch  scholars,  Pierson,  Loman,  etc.  (Jiilicher, 
Einleitung ,  §§  2,  8).  Singularly  enough,  they  stand  Baur's 
theory  on  its  head,  using  the  Book  of  Acts  to  prove  the  un- 
genuineness  of  Galatians,  etc.  Sane  scholarship  is  tempted  to 
wish  that  the  rite  of  excommunication  were  within  its  control. 
The  only  significant  consequence  of  such  criticism  is  to  give 
occasion  to  the  enemies  of  criticism  to  settle  themselves  com- 
fortably in  the  seat  of  the  scornful. 

2  The  book  called  Lux  MuncU  may  be  taken  as  partly  coming 
under  this  rule.  Since  the  storm  raised  by  Essays  and  Bei-iews, 
the  "  High  Churchmen  "  of  the  Anglican  communion  have  found 
itea.siertochangf  from  ihiui  the  '■  Low  Churchmen."  They  liave 
used  the  ' '  Chui'ch ' '  to  lessen  the  strain  upon  the  Scriptures. 


160      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


The  Church 

idea  not 
strong. 


Academic 
thought 
aloof  from 
popular 
feeliug. 


and  how  far  the  liberty  thus  acquired  is  real  or  per- 
manent, are  questions  that  do  not  here  concern  us.  It 
is  enough  to  know  that  on  both  sides  of  the  water  it  is 
a  possible  procedure.  The  "Church"  idea  is  now 
being  used  to  take  away  the  terrors  of  criticism,  open- 
ing into  popular  acceptance  a  broad  door  for  the  self- 
same critical  process  which  a  generation  ago  it  forbade 
altogether. 

In  Protestant  Germany  the  Church  idea  was  not 
strong  enough  to  play  this  part.  It  is  true  that  a 
High  Church  movement  went  on,  practically  parallel 
with  the  Oxford  Movement.  The  wave  of  romanti- 
cism that  swept  through  Europe  in  the  20's  and  30's 
carried  a  number  of  prominent  individuals  over  to 
Rome.  In  alarm  at  this,  and  at  the  disintegrating 
tendencies  of  the  day,  an  attempt  was  made  to  give 
to  the  Church  a  larger  place,  a  more  real  authority.^ 
This  was  in  keeping  with  the  political  tendencies  of 
the  day.  For,  after  Waterloo,  the  conservative  forces 
of  the  State  were  in  the  saddle,  and  rode  with  a  reck- 
less hand.^  Yet,  with  all  this  to  favour.  High  Church- 
manship  made  slight  headway.  The  critical  tendency 
was  too  strong  to  be  roughly  checked. 

The  other  difference  in  the  situation  is  found  in 
that  close  connection  between  popular  religious  feel- 
ing and  academic  thought  which  is  characteristic  of 
England  and  America,  and  which  has  been  notably 
absent  from  Germany.  In  the  latter  country  the  aca- 
demic world  has  been  a  world  almost  by  itself.     The 


1  E.g.  Kahnis  (Kurz,  Church  History  (tr.  1878),  II,  pp.  317, 
373). 

2  Baur,  Christ.  Eirche,Y,  pp.  108-113;  Life  of  Schleier- 
macher,  II,  p.  208.  Hegel's  glorification  of  the  status  quo  — 
the  monarchical  appropriation  of  his  principle,  "the  rational  is 
the  real,"  for  use  against  'he  revolutionary  and  reformatory- 
principle. 


THE  SCHOOLS  161 

professor's  chair  is  a  long  way  from  the  pulpit.^  So 
Biblical  study,  having  its  headquarters  in  the  uni- 
versity, lias  been  fearless  and  aggressive  to  a  degree 
wholly  beyond  tlie  reach  of  other  Protestant  lands. 

Hence,  the  conservative  wing  of  the  critical  move- 
ment had  far  less  power  either  for  attack  or  defence 
than  it  has  with  us.     Yet  it  had  considerable  power. 
And  in  tlie  early  years  of  the  reaction  against  Baur, 
it  put  forward  a  kind  of  scholarship  that  took  a  deep 
though  insecure  and  troubled  pleasure  in  the  revival 
of  the  kind  of  knowledge  that  passed  current  after 
the  fourth  century.     Thus  Tischendorf,  justly  famous 
in  the  history  of  text-criticism,  left  his  proper  work 
to  speak  a  word  on  the  Higher  Criticism  that  should 
bring  controversy  to  an  end.     In  his  book  entitled 
When  were  the  Gospels  Written?  he  went  the  whole 
length  of   the  ancient  tradition,  asserting  that   the   Revival  of 
Apostle  John  closed  and  settled  the  New  Testament  Slfal'^' 
Canon. 2     Thiersch,  another  apologete  for  the  ancient  views, 
traditions,  accepted  them  in  every  detail,  just  as  they 
passed  over  from  the  fourth  century  to  the  fifth.    The 
New  Testament  Canon  was  practically  constituted  and 
bounded  in  the  first  century ;  and  the  doubts  of  the 
second  and  third  centuries  concerning  certain  books 
were  due,  not  to  uncertainty,  but  to  extreme  care  and 
caution.^      Guericke*   and  Wieseler^    defended    the 
tradition  in  a  more  moderate  spirit  than  Tischendorf 
and  Thiersch,  yet  on  the  same  lines.     Hoffman,  head 
of  the  "  Erlangen  School,"  set  up  against  Baur's  central 

1  Reuss,  UlSglise  et  V^cole,  1854. 

2  Tischendorf,  Wann  wurden  unsere  Evangelien  verfasst  f 
2«  Auf..  1865. 

3  Thiersch,  Versuch  zur  Herstellung  d.  histor.  Slaiidpunktes 
fur  die  Kritik  der  nentost.  SchriftPU,  1845. 

*  Guericke,  Einleitung  i.  d.  N.  T.,  1854. 

6  Wieseler,  C.  G.,  Chronologic  des  apostol.  Zeitalt.,  1848. 

M 


162     HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Scholars 
who  be- 
long to  no 
"  School." 


thought  a  conception  equally  dogmatic.  Baur  carried 
into  the  New  Testament  the  Hegelian  idea  of  develop- 
ment through  contrariety ;  and  where  he  could  not  find 
a  way  for  his  conception  he  made  one  by  main  force. 
Against  this  idea  of  development,  Hoffmann  set  up 
the  thought  of  an  organic  unity  ol  revelation  unfold- 
ing itself  in  divers'ways  at  divers  times.  His  concep- 
tion was  quite  as  true  as  Baur's,  but,  as  he  used  it, 
quite  as  arbitrary  in  its  interference  with  history.  It 
always  brought  him,  often  by  ingenious  and  winding 
ways,  into  agreement  with  the  traditions.^ 

Baur's  central  conception  was  opposed  by  othei 
scholars,  who  differed  widely  from  the  group  just 
described.  They  cannot  be  called  conservatives,  being 
altogether  too  free  in  their  methods,  too  independent 
of  the  traditions.  They  are  mentioned  at  this  point, 
not  because  they  belonged  to  any"  School,"  but  because, 
chronologically,  they  come  within  Baur's  own  period. 
Furthermore,  they  serve  to  remind  us  that  we  are 
dealing  with  a  vast  movement,  partly  literary,  partly 
theological,  partly  religious.  Naturally  and  inevi- 
tably, the  crisis  of  1835  called  out  every  shade  and 
variety  of  opinion.  We  make  use  of  the  division  into 
schools  not  so  much  for  the  amount  of  ground  it  accu- 
rately covers,  as  for  the  reason  that,  in  dealing  with 
a  vast  literature,  some  sort  of  clew  through  the  maze 
is  indispensable. 

De  Wette,  in  the  fifth  edition  of  his  Introduction 
(1847),  set  himself  in  opposition  to  Baur.  His  cool, 
clear  head  guarded  him  from  philosophical  as  well 
as  from  dogmatic  contagion.  Ewald,  a  great  scholar, 
but  a  born  fighter,  vehemently  assailed  Baur's  idea 
of    development    through   a   fundamental    antithesis 


1  Hoffmann,  Bleek-Mangold,  pp.  41,  42;  Baur,  Christ.  Kirche, 
pp.  411,  412. 


THE  SCHOOLS  163 

between  Petrinisra  and  Paulinism.^  Reuss,  a  true 
master  in  the  Bible-work  of  our  century,  went  iiis 
own  way,  independent  both  of  Baur  and  the  traditional 
view.  Unlike  Ewald,  lie  saw  a  truth  in  Baur's  central 
conception,  doing  justice  to  the  differences  between 
Jewish  Christianity  and  Paul.  At  the  same  time,  by 
his  conception  of  Christ  he  made  Christianity  practi- 
cally catholic  from  the  beginning.  Hence,  in  his  con- 
clusions he  found  himself  near  most  of  the  traditional 
positions.'^ 

The  school  of  Schleiermacher  got  the  name  of  School  of 
"mediating"  because  it  sought,  or  seemed  to  seek,  ^^ache"" 
the  middle  ground  between  the  critical  and  the  con- 
servative tendencies.^  Schleiermacher  did  not  live  to 
see  the  violent  precipitation  of  opinion  that  followed 
1835  (tl834).  He  was  altogether  too  many-sided  a 
man  to  belong  to  any  school.*    He  was  free  in  his 

1  Ewald,  Die  dreiersten  Evangelien,  1850  ;  Die  Sendschreihen 
d.  Ap.  Pmdiis,  1857  ;  DieJohan.  Schriften,  1861.  Work  summed 
up  in  Vols.  VI  and  VII  of  his  Volk  Israel. 

2  Reuss,  Histoire  d.l.  Theol.  chretienne,  etc.,  1852-1864; 
Oesch.  d.  heiligen  Schrift  N.  T.,  5th  ed.,  1874  (tr.  1884).  One 
of  the  best  scholars  of  our  century,  singularly  independent  and 
cool-headed. 

8  The  name  "  mediating  school  "  is  not  wholly  fair.  It  sug- 
gests a  conscious,  almost  self-conscious,  attempt  to  find  a  via 
media;  whereas  the  members  of  the  "school"  were,  on  the 
whole,  as  sincerely  devoted  to  the  truth,  as  the  members  of  the 
"critical"  school.  It  is  not  worth  the  while  of  men  outside 
Germany  to  perpetuate  the  odium  scholasticum  and  criticum 
which  has  sometimes  been  strongly  in  evidence  in  Germany, 

«  "Es  ist  vielleicht  nicht  ein  Theolog,  welcher  durchaus  mit 
Schleiermacher  iibereinstimmt,"  says  Gieseler  in  Kirchenge- 
schichte,  V,  pp.  241,  242.  Hase  well  says  that  the  Professor  and 
the  Pastor  supplemented  each  other  in  him  (Kirchengeschichte, 
p,  395),  — something  that  cannot  be  said  of  many  Germans, 
To  those  who  would  know  the  inner  life  of  Germany  it  is  as 
necessary  to  know  Schleiermacher  as  to  know  Kant, 


164      HISTORY  or  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Christianity 
and  Christ. 


Two 

elements 
in  Schlei- 
ermacher. 


attitude  toward  the  New  Testament  books.  Besides, 
he  affirmed  the  dogmatic  insignificance  of  the  Virgin 
Birth  and  the  bodily  resurrection  of  our  Lord.  Yet 
the  "  mediating  school "  rightly  claims  him  as  its  head. 
For  in  Schleiermacher  the  two  main  needs  of  our  cen- 
tury, the  religious  and  the  scientific,  undertook  to 
settle  their  differences.  His  heart  was  with  the 
Pietism  of  the  eighteenth  century.  And  through  his 
heart  he  learned  what  Christianity  is.  Christianity 
is  Christ  —  the  historical  Christ.  The  one  idea  that 
conveys  permanent  meaning  to  the  Christian  Church 
is  the  idea  that  the  ideal  of  the  divine  life  does  not 
lie  ahead,  as  a  bare  duty  for  the  race,  but  lies  behind 
us  and  beneath  us  as  an  historical  achievement.  The 
divine  life  was  perfectly  realised  in  the  human  life 
of  Christ:  realised  within  the  human,  not  injuring 
its  integrity,  doing  no  hurt  to  its  rights.  This  idea 
is  the  everlasting  content  of  the  Christian  conscious- 
ness, which  has  known  from  the  beginning,  without 
a  break,  that  Christ  is  its  creator,  and  which  finds  in 
the  New  Testament  a  trustworthy  book  of  witness  to 
Christ's  character  and  work. 

In  his  thought,  Schleiermacher  was,  in  the  fullest 
sense,  a  man  of  our  time.  He  was  all  alive  with 
the  passionate  desire  to  know,  to  get  at  the  original 
forms  of  life  and  mind.  On  the  mental  side  he  was 
born  a  Greek,  just  as,  on  the  emotional  side,  he  was 
born  a  Christian.  The  religious  and  the  scientific 
moods  mingled  in  him  most  deeply  and  subtly.  Pos- 
sibly, he  is  the  most  representative  man  of  our  century. 

Through  the  union  of  head  and  heart  he  worked  out 
of  the  fundamental  heresy  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
—  its  separation  of  the  ideal  and  the  historical.^    And, 

^Christ.  Glaube  (1851),  ^  10,  11,  93;  Nitzsch.  Evangel. 
Dogmatik  (1892),  p.  33  ;  Reuss,  Hist,  of  the  N.  T.,  II,  pp.  608, 
609. 


THE  SCHOOLS 


165 


in  principle,  he  had  seen  and  overcome  the  main  con- 
clusions of  Strauss  and  Baur  before  they  were  broached. 
At  the  same  time,  by  his  mental  strength  and  vigour, 
he  opened  wide  the  door  into  a  fresh  examination  of 
the  sources  of  our  religion.  Pietism  and  rationalism, 
even  as  they  worked  together  in  Semler,  so  they 
worked  together  in  liim,  but  after  an  incomparably 
deeper  fashion.  And  so,  when  1835  sounded  the  call 
to  arms,  the  scholars  who  would  fain  pay  in  full  the 
bond  signed  at  the  Keformation,  took  from  Schleier- 
macher  their  text  and  their  inspiration. 

From  this  school  came  the  Church  historian,  Nean- 
der.  His  famous  saying,  "The  heart  makes  the 
theologian,"  expressed  his  point  of  view,^  Easy  as 
it  is  to  distort  and  misapply  the  saying,  none  the  less 
it  contains  a  thought  which  has  great  weight,  not 
merely  for  the  theologian,  but  for  the  critic.  The 
New  Testament  is,  in  the  supreme  sense,  a  book  of 
religions  feeling.  Baur  judged  it  from  the  standpoint 
of  the  speculative  idea.  As  a  result,  not  only  did  he 
misread  many  parts  of  it,  he  also  mistook  its  spirit 
and  method.  For  religious  feeling  does  not  communi- 
cate itself  by  speculation  as  the  idea  does,  but  chiefly 
by  the  contagion  of  enthusiasm.  It  is  not  an  affair 
of  the  school;  it  is  a  popular  movement.  Its  literary 
products  do  not  smell  of  the  lamp.^  Its  conclusions 
are  reached  not  so  much  by  logical  processes  as  through 
the  divining  power  of  practical  needs. ^  And  it  follows 
from  this  tliat  a  critic  trained  as  Baur,  and  as  many 
a  critic  since  his  day  has  been  trained,  in  a  purely 
philosopliic  and  academic  way,  might  be  a  poor  judge 

1  Schaff,  Germany,  Its  Universities,  etc., Tp.21S ;  Baur,  Christ. 
Kirch  e,  p.  385. 

2  With  the  possible  exception  of  the  Ep.  to  the  Hebrews. 

8  The  practical  line  along  which  St.  Paul  works  up  to  his 
great  Christological  position  in  Phil.  2.  1-6,  is  a  good  example. 


The  f  undst- 
niental 
heresy  of 
eighteenth 
centi'ry. 


"The  heart 
makes  the 
theologian." 


166      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Battle  over 
the  Fourth 
Gospel. 


Members 
of  school. 


—  spite  of  strong  analytic  powers  —  of  some  things 
very  material  to  a  just  and  all-round  view  of  the  New 
Testament.  Like  to  like  is  a  good  rule  in  interpreta- 
tion. And  it  may  fairly  be  doubted  whether  a  critic 
whose  knowledge  of  religion  is  well-nigh  wholly  liter- 
ary and  doctrinaire  is  likely  to  be  a  satisfactory  judge 
of  a  book  like  the  Fourth  Gospel.  Can  a  Russian 
understand  the  history  of  Magna  Charta?^ 

To  gauge  the  work  of  the  school  of  Schleiermacher, 
the  Tubingen  school  must  be  kept  in  mind.  Baur's 
great  hypothesis  was  either  the  point  of  view  or  the 
point  of  attack  for  all  the  New  Testament  scholars. 
The  so-called  "  tendency  "  theory,  the  position  that  the 
historical  books  of  the  New  Testament  are  not  so 
much  historical  as  dogmatic,  was  naturally  the  chief 
offence  to  those  who  stood  anywhere  near  the  tradi- 
tional view  of  Christianity.  And  inasmuch  as  the 
Fourth  Gospel  was  assessed  by  Baur  as  the  extreme 
case  of  "tendency,"  —  it  being,  in  fact,  a  theological 
romance,  —  around  it  the  fiercest  fighting  raged. 
Indeed,  without  going  far  astray,  one  might  take  the 
history  of  the  Johannine  question  as  a  vertical  cut 
through  the  entire  history  of  New  Testament  study 
since  its  turning-point.^ 

Bleek  (f  1859)  was  a  devoted  pupil  of  Schleiermacher, 
and  his  master  said  of  him  that  he  had  the  charism  of 
"Introduction,"  of  historical  insight  into  the  problems 
and  connections  of  Biblical  study.  ^    The  word  was 


1  Compare  Freeman,  Methods  of  Historical  Study  (1886), 
p.  289. 

2  Watkins,  Fourth  Gospel. 

3  Bleek,  Introduction  to  N.  T.  (tr.  1879).  In  his  mental 
quality  he  resembled  Bretschneider,  De  Wette,  and  other  schol- 
ars of  an  earlier  period,  who  were  content  oftentimes  to  reach 
a  probability  (K.  J.  Nitzsch  in  Realencycl.  (1897),  p.  256). 
"Probability  "  went  out  of  fashion  when  Baur  came  in. 


ruE  SCHOOLS  167 

well  said.  For  Bleek  is  one  of  the  sanest  and  sound- 
est scholars  of  our  century.  He  defended  the  Fourth 
Gospel  with  special  zeal.  He  adhered  to  the  traditions 
concerning  the  New  Testament  Canon  almost  in  block. 
Yet  he  was  fair-minded  to  a  high  degree.  Lechler, 
unlike  Bleek,  whose  Biblical  studies  were  well 
advanced  before  Baur  came  above  the  horizon,  was 
conceived,  and  born,  and  bred  in  mental  opposition  to 
the  Tubingen  school.  Hence,  perhaps,  a  certain  men- 
tal impetuosity,  which  he  shared  with  the  scholars  of 
his  time.  Baur  introduced  hypotheses  of  the  grand 
style  into  New  Testament  studies,  and  made  them  the 
order  of  the  day  for  his  friends  and  foes  alike. 
Lechler  accepts  from  Baur  the  idea  that  the  Pauline 
doctrine  is  the  dominating  point  in  the  Apostolic 
age ;  but  finds  in  it  nothing  but  a  clear  expression  of 
the  teaching  of  the  Twelve.  By  the  help  of  this  con- 
ception, he  achieves  a  view  of  Apostolic  development 
which  keeps  close  to  the  traditional  lines;  at  the  same 
time,  he  is  hardly  inferior  to  Baur  in  the  art  of  hear- 
ing grass  grow  in  the  Holy  Land.^  More  recently, 
Weiss  has  used  a  conception  practically  identical  with 
Lechler's,  but  with  a  far  larger  fund  of  exact  know- 
ledge and  with  a  better-balanced  judgment.^ 

The  school  of  Ritschl  succeeded  the  school  of  School  of 
Schleiermacher  in  theology,  and,  in  some  measure,  in 
criticism.  Its  founder  began  his  career  in  the  school 
of  Baur.^  From  it  he  got  his  start,  learning  how  to 
put  the  main  question.  Down  to  the  Reformation,  as 
we  have  seen,  the  Church  and  the  Bible  were  treated 
as  inseparable  parts  of  one  mystical  body  of  truth  — 
the  whole  of  it  lifted  above  the  level  of  reason,  beyond 

1  Lechler,  Apostolic  and  Post-ApostoUc  Times,  1851,  tr.  1886. 

2  Bernhard  Weiss,    Einldtung  i.  d.  X.  T.,  2^  Auf.,  1889. 
8  Bleek-Mangold,  pp.  51,  52  ;  Ritschl's  Leben. 


Ritschl. 


168      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Relation  of 
Church  and 
Bible. 


"  Origin  of 
Old  Catholic 
Church." 


the  reach  of  questions,  and,  consequently,  put  out  of 
touch  with  history.  The  Reformation  tore  the  idea  of 
the  Church  away  from  the  idea  of  Scripture  and  threw 
it  to  reason  to  be  investigated  and  discussed.  But 
the  Bible  still  held  its  head  high  above  reason  and 
history.  The  eighteenth  century  broke  down  its 
guard,  by  decomposing  the  ancient  conception  of 
inspiration.  For  a  while  the  study  of  the  Canon  was 
pursued  along  literary  lines.  Then  Baur  led  the  way 
into  the  study  of  the  New  Testament  as  the  record 
and  product  of  an  historical  movement.  And  now  the 
ideas  of  the  Church  and  Bible,  long  separated,  came 
together  again.  It  is  seen  that  the  Church  and  the 
Canon  grew  up  together.  Baur,  overusing  the  fact 
of  strife  within  the  Apostolic  Church  and  staying 
himself  upon  certain  phenomena  of  the  second  cen- 
tury,^ derived  the  origin  of  the  Church  from  the 
impassioned  Judaism  of  the  Twelve.  Hence,  in  order 
to  account  for  our  existing  New  Testament,  —  it  being 
almost  wholly  non- Jewish  and  Catholic,  —  he  needed 
a  long  course  of  years  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  in 
the  year  70. 

Eitschl  learned  from  Baur  how  to  put  the  question. 
In  1850  he  published  a  book  entitled  The  Origin  of  the 
Old  Catholic  Church.'^  The  title  is  luminous.  If  we 
would  understand  the  rise  of  our  New  Testament 
Scriptures,  we  must  understand  the  rise  of  the  Old 
Catholic  Church,  or  the  Church  of  the  second  century. 
In  the  second  edition  of  his  book  (1857)  Kitschl  broke 
completely  away  from  Baur's  explanation.^  The 
Christianity  of  the  second  century  resulted  from  the 
popularisation  of  Paulinism.     Paulinism,  therefore, 

1  Estimate  of  Pseudo-Clementine  literature  in  Church  History 
of  First  Three  Centuries. 

2  Ritschl,  Die  Entstehunrj  der  altkatholischen  Kirche,  1850. 
*  Ritschl  had  precursors  (Bleek-3Iangold,  pp.  46,  47). 


THE  SCHOOLS  169 

not  Judaism,  was  the  real  foundation  of  the  Old  Catho- 
lic Ciiurch.  Herewith  Baur's  hypothesis  was  hit 
in  a  vital  part.  The  "  tendency  "  idea  henceforward 
fluttered  away  with  a  wounded  wing.  For,  however 
marked  the  differences  between  Paul  and  the  Twelve, 
they  are  substantially  one. 

Reuss  said,  in  criticism  of  Baur's  theory,  that  devel- 
opments may  be  parallel;  that  they  are  not  neces- 
sarily successive.  The  point  of  the  saying  is  here;  a 
great  religious  and  social  revolution  is  inevitably 
many-sided.  Baur  ended  by  putting  the  New  Testa- 
ment literature  on  the  rack,  in  order  to  force  it  into 
conformity  with  a  rigid  conception  of  development.* 
But  life  is  infinitely  larger  than  logic,  and  the  Chris-  Life  and 
tian  life  of  the  first  century  will  not  support  Baur's  °^°' 
interpretation  of  its  literature.  Ritschl,  starting  as 
a  member  of  the  Tubingen  school,  as  free  as  Baur 
himself  from  "entangling  alliances"  with  the  tradi- 
tional scheme  of  knowledge  about  the  isew  Testament 
books,  attacked  the  great  hypothesis  upon  purely  his- 
torical grounds.  He  so  far  overcame  it  that  substan- 
tial modifications  became  necessary,  if  the  hypothesis 
was  to  retain  any  scholarly  standing. 

This  much  secured,  equally  substantial  modifica-  Modification 
tions  of  Baur's  chronology  of  New  Testament  litera-  chronology? 
ture  must  follow.  Harnack's  declarations  regarding 
the  Tubingen  school  are,  possibly,  a  trifle  sweeping.^ 
His  affirmation  that  the  chronologic  framework  within 
which  the  traditions  placed  the  New  Testament  books 
is  correct  in  nearly  every  particular,  has,  perhaps,  too 
imposing  an  air  of  finality.*    But  he  is  within  bounds 

1  Cf.  Hegel's  handling  of  the  history  of  philosophy  (Zeller, 
PhUosophie  der  Griechen  (4"  Auf.,  1876),  I,  pp.  8-11). 

-  Chronolofiie ,  etc..  p.  ix.  Holtzraann's  criticism  is  essentially 
just  {Einleitung,  pp.  205-207). 

*  Chronologie,  p.  x.     The  cries  of  joy  with  which  England 


170      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

when  he  affirms  that  the  relative  mental  and  spiritual 
unity  of  the  New  Testament  would  not  have  been  pos- 
sible, had  not  its  various  books  been  written  within  a 
comparatively  short  period.  This  "  was  the  Achilles' 
heel  in  Baur's  construction  of  Apostolic  history."^ 

and  America  saluted  Harnack's  proclamation  gave  melancholy 
proof  of  the  nervous  condition  of  the  Churches. 

1  Bruno  Bauer  and  Feuerbach  are  men  whom  it  is  impossible 
to  group  under  any  of  the  heads  used  above,  without  doing  se- 
rious injustice  to  their  neighbours.  Taken  together,  however, 
they  constitute  a  phenomenon  of  which  our  subject  must  take 
serious  account.  They  are  a  notable  mental  symptom.  In  both 
of  them  the  human  swallowed  the  divine.  "  Anthropology  is 
the  secret  of  theologj',"  was  Feuerbach's  text.  Jesus  and  Paul 
are  dramatic  creations,  was  Bruno  Bauer's  thesis.  As  indicat- 
ing a  current  of  feeling  deep  and  strong  in  our  day,  they  are 
significant.  Cf.  Feuerbach  with  Comte.  Hoffding,  Hist,  of 
Modern  Philosophy  (tr.  1890),  II,  pp.  272-293;  Baur,  Christ. 
Kirche,  pp.  390-394  ;  Schmidt,  Oesch.  d.  deutschen  Lit.^  Ill,  pp. 
271-290. 


CHAPTER  X 


THE    HISTORICAL    SPIRIT    IX    NEW    TESTAMENT    STUDY 


The  one  solid  and  certain  gain  of  criticism  is  that 
the  study  of  the  Xew  Testament  has  entered,  once  for 
all,  the  historical  stage.  Other  things  are  in  doubt. 
Touching  the  specific  questions  broached  since  1750, 
it  is  not  safe  or  wise  to  say  that  we  have  got  down  to 
the  bottom  facts.  We  have  shaped  no  final  judgments. 
Our  most  assured  results  do  not  rise  higher  than  a 
very  strong  probability.  One  thing,  however,  is 
secure.  The  Sacred  Books  are  being  studied  as  thor- 
oughly human  books.  And  they  are  being  studied  in 
the  historical  spirit. 

Tlie  sense  of  fact  has  triumphed  over  the  dogma  of 
infallibility  in  all  its  forms.  It  was  impossible,  as 
long  as  that  dogma  held  its  ground,  for  the  original 
facts  of  sacred  history,  the  original  thought  and 
feeling  of  the  men  of  the  Bible,  to  come  into  view. 
Infallibility,  whether  Biblical  or  ecclesiastical,  is  an 
arrangement  whereby  the  definitions  of  a  later  time, 
assuming  a  fictitious  finality,  draw  upon  the  credit  of 
a  sacred  past  to  pay  their  debts  to  reason.  The  Sacred 
Books  were  indeed  exalted  on  high.  No  man  dared 
question  them.     They  were  above  examination.     The 

1  Droysen,  Principles  of  History,  tr.  by  Andrews  ;  Gervinus. 
GrnndzUf/e  dcr  Historik.  1837  ;  Briggs,  The  Study  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  1899;  Baur,  F.  C,  Die  Epochen  d.  kirchlichen  Oe- 
schichtschreibunfj.  1852  ;  Freeman,  Methods  of  Historical  Study, 
1886  ;  Bernheim,  Handbuch  d.  histor.  Methode. 

171 


The  histori- 
cal spirit  the 
chief  gain. 


Sense  of 
fact  and 
dogma  of 
infallibility. 


172      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

devout  student  of  the  ancient  days  said,  regarding 
them,  that  they  were  like  a  great  river,  on  whose  edge 
the  little  child  may  play,  and  in  whose  depths  the 
elephant,  the  mightiest  of  living  creatures,  loses  his 
footing.  And  he  spoke  the  truth.  For  the  Scriptures, 
the  books  of  witness  to  the  saving  unity  of  the  divine 
life,  are  level  with  the  highest  human  praise. 

But  the  Scriptures  paid  a  heavy  price  for  their 
alleged  infallibility.  They  were  insured  against  fear- 
less reason,  against  scientific  curiosity.  From  what 
source,  though,  issued  the  insurance?  Not  from 
themselves.  In  the  last  resort,  it  came  from  the 
infallibility  of  the  Church.  And  so,  in  order  to  find 
a  safe  asylum,  the  Bible  must  hand  over  the  keys  of 
interpretation  to  a  monasticised,  clerical  establish- 
ment heading  up  in  a  Pope,  By  so  doing,  however, 
the  Bible  disowns  its  own  history.  Monks  and  mys- 
tics did  not  write  it.  And  all  the  monks  and  mystics 
put  together  cannot  find  the  heart  of  its  mystery. 
The  Bible,  to  be  rightly  interpreted,  must  have  the 
power  of  the  keys  in  its  own  hands.  It  will  not  pay 
the  price  which  the  attribute  of  infallibility  demands. 
It  prefers  to  be  examined,  to  be  questioned,  to  take 
its  chances  with  a  fearless  reason. 
Outlying.  Now,  the  essence  of  reason  is  the  imperative  and 

authoritative  feeling  of  outlying  facts.  In  the  form 
of  psychology  reason  deals  with  the  processes  of  mind. 
In  the  form  of  science  it  deals  with  the  universe 
besetting  the  mind.  In  the  form  of  philosophy  it 
deals  with  the  final  questions  to  which  experience, 
taken  largely,  gives  rise.  But  in  every  form  reason, 
if  it  be  lively  and  forthputting,  consists  in  an  impera- 
tive sense  of  facts  lying  out  beyond  the  received  and 
established  explanations,  and  in  the  feeling  of  authori- 
tative obligation  to  know  the  facts  as  they  are  in 
themselves.    Consequently,  the  dogma  of  infallibility, 


facts. 


EISTOniCAL   SPIRIT  173 

if  it  be  anything  more  tlian  a  legal  fiction  or  a  pious 

epithet,  if  it  be  taken  seriously,  is  foreign  to  reason. 

By  ascribing  an  unnatural  and  impossible  finality  to 

established  interpretations,  it  keeps  the  outlying  facts 

of  revelation  from  exercising  due  pressure  upon  the 

mind  of  the  Church.     At  the  same  time,  it  is  foreign 

to  the  character  of   revelation;  for,  when    followed  Reason 

liome,  it  turns  the  human  author  of  the  Sacred  Books   iation  both 

out  of  doors,  leaving  the  Divine  Author  in  exclusive  "pJ'^j?,'1^^ 

possession.     So  reason  and  the  Bible  have  conspired 

to  make  the  sense  of  fact  supreme  over  the  dogmatic 

needs  of  the  Church  establishment. 

This  is  our  great  and  permanent  gain.  It  cannot 
be  taken  away  from  us.  The  conditions  of  the  time 
safeguard  it.^  The  scientific  motive  and  the  religious 
motive  are  united  in  their  devotion  to  this  end.  The 
historical  spirit,  in  New  Testament  study,  the  spirit 
whose  sole  concern  is  the  being  and  scope  of  the  origi- 
nal facts  and  thought  of  Apostolic  history,  —  the  origi- 
nal text  of  our  Lord's  life  and  words,  —  has  taken  the 
sceptre  and  cannot  be  dethroned.  The  New  Testament 
books  are  no  longer  to  be  studied  in  the  dogmatic  mood.^ 

1  The  contrast  between  our  age  and  tliat  wherein  the  principle 
of  Tradition  found  a  free  field  is  as  broad  as  it  can  well  be.  Our 
commerce  is  vast.  The  race  is  throwing  all  its  accumulations  of 
experience  into  one  collection.  Ideas  and  impressions  are  in 
eager  competition.  The  study  of  religion  is  comparative.  The 
body  of  facts  within  our  ken  is  steadily  and  rapidly  growing, 
and  evei-y  increase  of  data  deepens  our  feeling  for  the  facts 
that  are  pressing  forward  into  knowledge.  Reason  is  forced 
to  keep  open  house.     Hypotheses  cannot  maintain  a  fixed  form. 

2  The  work  of  Robinson  might  be  taken  as  typical.  lie  sought 
to  strip  off  the  false  skin  of  '•  topographical  tradition  long  since 
fastened  upon  the  Holy  Land  by  foreign  ecclesiastics  and 
monks"  {Biblical  Ursearches,  1841,  I,  pp.  vii.  viii).  In  just 
the  same  way  criticism  has  stripped  from  the  N.  T.  books  the 
false  skin  of  ecclesiastical  tradition  and  theory  fastened  upon 
them  by  a  later  time. 


174      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


Idea  of  de- 
velopmeut. 


Ancient  in- 
terpretation 
lacked  it. 


The  idea  of  evolution  has  come  iu  the  train  of  the 
historical  spirit.^  The  need  of  it  was  not  nearly  so 
great  in  the  field  of  the  New  Testament  as  it  was  in 
the  field  of  the  Old.  There  are  considerable  elements 
in  the  Old  Testament  which  belong  to  early  and  out- 
grown stages  of  religious  experience.  The  Fathers, 
wholly  lacking  our  idea,  could  not  make  their  presence 
in  Scripture  intelligible  save  by  the  help  of  the  alle- 
gorical interpretation.  Without  allegory  they  must 
needs  have  rejected  the  divine  authorship  of  the  Old 
Testament.  Evolution  makes  allegory  needless.  The 
things  which  so  greatly  troubled  the  Fathers  become 
for  us  intelligible  as  parts  of  the  divine  schooling  oi 
Israel. 

No  such  need  ever  existed  in  New  Testament  study: 
for  the  New  Testament  contains  no  Levitical  anc 
primitive  elements.  None  the  less,  when  we  conside] 
the  matter  more  from  a  general  and  less  from  a  spe^ 
cific  point  of  view,  the  profits  of  the  New  Testameni 
are  as  great  as  those  of  the  Old.  There  is  a  menta' 
movement  and  change  amongst  the  men  of  the  Nct^ 
Testament.  But  under  the  old  categories  or  habitf 
of  thought,  change  was  irreconcilable  with  the  divine 
The  divine,  as  such,  was  always  conceived  to  be  immu 
table.  Hence,  the  divine  self-revelation  could  noi 
realise  itself  in  a  truly  historical  way :  for  history 
necessarily  involves  change. 

The  history  of  heresy  makes  some  strange  bedfel 
lows.  The  fundamental  error  of  the  eighteenth  cen 
tury  was  its  disbelief  in  the  capacity  of  the  historica 


1  The  idea  of  evolution,  like  the  true  conception  of  languag 
and  grammar,  took  shape  outside  the  field  of  Biblical  studj 
Yet  the  Biblical  doctrine  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  is  one  of  tl 
main  causes  of  the  conception  ;  for  evolution  was  a  social  pr 
gramme  before  it  became  a  scientific  hypothesis.     The  idea 
not  a  trespasser  upon  the  Biblical  field. 


niSTOIilCAL   SPIRIT  175 

to  take  in  the  ideal,  and  in  the  ability  or  disposition 
of  the  ideal  to  possess  and  pervade  the  historical. 
This  error  tinged  all  thought  regarding  revelation. 
Kant's  view  was  as  deeply  discoloured  by  it  as  Tom 
Paine's.  Now,  so  far  as  the  forms  of  thouglit  go,  this 
root-error  is  identical  with  the  implicit  premise  of 
the  ancient  Church.  If  we  were  to  classify  theo- 
logians by  the  way  in  which  their  minds  work,  rather 
than  by  the  specific  forms  which  their  theological  sys- 
tems assume  and  the  objects  of  devotion  on  which 
their  minds  rest,  we  might  discover  that  the  deistic 
thought  of  the  eighteenth  century  has  an  alarming 
family  likeness  to  patristic  orthodoxy.  For  the  latter 
is  no  more  able  than  the  former  to  think  together  the 
idea  of  a  divine  revelation  and  the  conception  of  a 
genuine  historical  movement. 

Practically,  the  Bible-students  of  ancient  times 
were  forced  to  choose  between  the  idea  of  revelation 
and  the  idea  of  history.  Now,  devout  men,  when 
driven  to  a  choice  like  that,  will  not  hesitate  for  a 
moment.  They  will  sacrifice  the  history  in  order  to 
•save  the  revelation.  So  with  the  Fathers.  They  did 
;not  purposely  belittle,  far  less  reject,  the  historical. 
'Origen  must  needs  have  gone  mad  before  he  could 
consciously  lower  the  significance  of  the  historical  and 
human  Saviour.  But  the  simple  truth  is,  that  they 
could  not,  with  all  the  good  intentions  in  the  world, 
ikeep  themselves  true  to  that  conception  of  revelation 
which  the  Bible  itself  contains.  The  mental  life  of 
antiquity  gave  them  no  help  toward  overcoming  the 
apparent  antipathy  between  the  ideal  and  the  histori- 
cal. On  the  contrary,  the  thought-forms  of  the  period 
fostered  the  difficulty.^    Against  its  will,  the  Bible- 

1  Aristotle,  seeking  to  correct  the  one-sidedness  of  Plato's 
idealism  and  so  build  a  bridge  from  *'  being  "  to  "becoming," 
struck  out  the  theory  of  evolutiuu.     It  is  the  supreme  evidence 


176      HISTORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


History  and 
revelation 
could  not 
be  made  to 
square. 


The  idea  of 
develoiiineiit 
brings  them 
together. 


study  of  antiquity  caused  revelation  and  history  to 
spring  apart. 

By  tlie  lielp  of  tlie  idea  of  evolution  revelation  and 
history  become  congenial.  For  the  conception  of  being 
and  the  fact  of  change  are  reconciled.  In  antiquity 
they  could  not  meet.  So  the  worthful,  the  divine, 
was  identified  with  the  unchangeable.  But  in  the 
modern  view  the  worthful  and  the  changeable  are 
organic  to  each  other;  we  cannot  conceive  of  a  law 
that  does  not  express  itself  in  movement  and  growth. 
So  we  are  enabled,  by  the  mental  habits  of  the  time, 
to  drive  the  old  heresy  out  of  consciousness.  To  our 
thinking,  revelation  is  so  far  from  being  suspicious  of 
history  that  it  demands  it.  Thus  the  Divine  Author 
of  Scripture  takes  the  human  author  to  be  his  prophet 
and  interpreter.^ 

The  reign  of  allegory  is  ended.  The  patristic  Bible- 
student  could  not  get  out  from  under  its  power.  He 
could  not  think  of  the  changeable  except  as  the  pro- 
fane and  unworthful.  Only  the  unchanging  could  be 
divine.  And  so  he  conceived  the  Scriptures  as  all  of 
one  piece  from  Genesis  to  the  Apocalypse,  as  being 
one  solid  block  of  inspired  truth.  What  he  found 
in  any  part  of  the  Bible,  he  could  find  in  all  parts. 


of  his  genius.  But  Aristotle  was  ages  ahead  of  his  time.  Greek 
thought,  taken  in  bulk,  was  far  from  helping  the  Christian  con- 
sciousness to  reconcile  the  ideal  and  the  historical.  It  was  in 
truth  a  severe  handicap.  Greek  speculation  as  a  body  cared 
almost  nothing  for  history. 

^  The  belief  in  evolution  has  become  the  personal  equation  of 
our  day.  Hence  the  student  needs  to  be  on  guard  against  it ; 
for  if  one  looks  long  enough,  one  always  fiuds  what  one  expects 
to  find.  In  the  contemporary  knowledge  of  the  N.  T.  there  is  a 
considerable  surplusage  which  the  facts  never  suggested  and 
which  they  will  not  sustain.  The  chief  part  of  it  is  the  product 
of  new-fangled  "psychology"  on  the  one  hand  and  an  over- 
worked idea  of  evolution  on  the  other. 


HISTORICAL   SPIRIT 


111 


The  deepest  truths  of  the  New  Testament  stood  out 
everywhere  in  the  Old.  The  Old  was  level  with  the 
New.  But  to  bring  it  level,  no  way  would  serve, 
except  the  way  of  allegory.  As  long  as  men  thought 
of  the  divine  as  the  absolutely  unchangeable,  there 
was  no  other  road  to  take.  Now,  we  have  seen  that 
the  allegorical  principle,  once  adopted,  would  have 
let  loose  a  chaos  of  interpretations,  unless  a  dogmatic 
tradition  had  bridled  it.  But  tlie  dogmatic  tradition, 
to  be  efficient,  required  a  great  clerical  establishment 
to  work  it.  Then  this  establishment,  to  make  tlie 
sacred  text  give  answers  that  squared  with  its  needs, 
had  to  use  the  allegorical  method  which  it  had  under- 
taken to  bridle.  So  the  allegorical  principle  remained 
in  full  force. 

The  modern  student,  thanks  to  the  historical  spirit   Allegorical 
and  to  the  great  conception  that  comes  in  its  train,    {|"."i'j'?  ^ 
rids  himself  of  allegory,  without  doing  injury  to  the   overcome, 
divine  character  of  Scripture.     If  he  be  as  reverent 
as  he  is  critical,  he  will  do  the  kind  of  work  that  the 
great   scholars   of   the   ancient   Church   would   have 
rejoiced  to  do,  had  the  mental  apparatus  of  their  times 
permitted  it.     He  is  giving  the  Bible  the  highest  pos- 
sible honour.     Through  his  labours,  the  sacred  text 
has  come  at  last  to  its  rights.    It  is  being  studied  and 
known  as  it  is  in  itself,  and  interpreted  along  the 
interior  lines  of  its  own  meaning  and  purpose. 

The  historical  spirit  has  registered  its  results  under 
various  departments,  or  "  disciplines."  Each  of  them, 
in  its  own  way,  pays  tribute  to  the  new  ideal  of  New 
Testament  study.  For  example,  "Introduction." 
As  to  its  scope,  opinions  differ.  But  there  is  no  dif- 
ference as  to  its  aim  and  method.  It  is  historical; 
that  is,  it  undertakes  to  set  the  Sacred  Books  within 
the  frame  of  their  time  and  place.  There  has  been 
some  dispute  in  Germany  touching  the  claims  of  one 

N 


178     HISTOBT  OF  THE  UIGBER   CRITICISM 


Conception 
of  Introduc- 
tion. 


New  Testa- 
ment theol- 
ogy- 


and  another  scholar  upon  the  title  to  the  first  use  of 
the  conception.^  The  dispute  is  not  altogether 
becoming  to  the  dignity  of  scholarship.  The  concep- 
tion of  Introduction  as  historical  was  the  product 
of  the  time  rather  than  the  work  of  any  individual. 
The  word  needed  only  to  be  spoken,  in  order  to  be  uni- 
versally approved.  Indeed,  it  has  become  so  much  a 
matter  of  course  that,  possibly,  we  shall  drop  the 
adjective  "historical"  in  the  title  of  our  Introduc- 
tions.^ The  aim  of  our  Introduction  is  instinc- 
tively non-dogmatic.  It  has  no  traditions  to  drill  into 
the  student.  Its  one  purpose  is  to  find  the  New  Tes- 
tament books  at  home  within  the  circumstances  that 
caused  their  conception  and  occasioned  their  birth. ^ 

Again,  the  theology  of  the  New  Testament  marks 
the  triumph  of  the  historical  over  the  dogmatic  spirit. 
From  the  date  of  Origen's  treatise  on  theology  down 
to  the  eighteenth  century,  systematic  divinity  was 
universally  assumed  to  be  one  and  the  selfsame  thing 
with  the  theology  of  the  Scriptures.  This  was 
inevitable.  Just  as  long  as  a  dogmatic  tradition, 
taking  itself  in  good  faith  as  infallible,  filled  and 
ruled  the  whole  mind  of  the  Church,  it  was  impossible 
for  the  idea  of  a  material  difference  between  the  estab- 
lished opinion  of  the  day  and  the  thought  of  the 
Scripture  to  find  entrance.  But  when  Tradition  broke 
down   and   dogmatic   divinity   lost    standing    before 

1  Credner  (1836),  Hupfeld  (  Ueher  Begriff  u.  Methode  der  sog. 
bib.  Einl.,  1844),  Bleek  {Introduction ,  I,  p.  1 ;  Bleek-Mangold, 
p.  5),  and  Reuss  have  claims  upon  it. 

2  Weiss,  Einleitung  i.  d.  N.  T.,  p.  19,  n.  1 ;  Reuss,  Hist,  of 

N.  r.,i,  pp.  1,2. 

8  If  the  student  will  read  what  Cassiodorus  has  to  say  about 
the  N.  T.  books,  and  then,  at  the  same  sitting,  read  some  mod- 
ern primer  like  Bennett's  Primer  of  the  Bible  or  Dodd's  Intro- 
duction, he  will  realise  how  broad  is  the  gulf  between  the  sixth 
century  and  our  own. 


HISTORICAL   SPIRIT 


179 


"The  Apos- 
tolic Age." 


reason,  men  were  enabled  to  entertain  the  idea  that 
the  theology  of  the  men  of  the  Bible  must  be  under- 
stood and  stated  as  if  the  theology  of  Tradition  had 
never  been  dreamed  of.^ 

So,  too,  the  form  of  study  entitled  "  The  Apostolic 
Age  "  has  humanised  the  ancient  conception  of  the 
Canon.  That  conception,  after  the  fourth  century, 
brought  the  New  Testament  before  the  mind's  eye  as 
a  mystical  total,  with  no  suggestion  of  movement  or 
change,  the  light  of  the  divine  so  flooding  it  that  the 
light  of  the  human  was  obliterated  even  as  the  sun  in 
his  strength  obliterates  the  stars.  But  ''the  Apostolic 
Age  "  brings  the  iSTew  Testament  literature  before  us 
as  tlie  outgrowth  of  and  the  witness  to  a  life  that  was 
rich  in  human  expression  and  sympathised  with  great 
historical  movements. 

And  so,  in  every  way,  the  stage  of  New  Testament  Christianity 
study,  into  which  we  have  entered,  is  inspired,  if  not  debt"to '  ^ 
dominated,  by  the  historical  spirit.     And  as  the  total  Christ, 
result,  that  past  which  for  the  Christian  Church  is 
the  sacred  and  authoritative  past,  —  the  person  and 
mind  of  Christ,  the  experience  and  interpretation  of 
the  Apostles,  —  is  rising  before  our  eyes  in  its  proper 
sliape  and  its  pristine  beauty.     The  debt  of  Chris- 
tianity to  Christ,  that  debt  which  the  Nicene  Church 
contracted,  the  mediaeval  Church  postponed,  and  the 
"Reformation  Church  promised  to  pay,  is  being  paid. 
We  are  seeking  to  know  our  Lord  according  to  his 
own  mind. 

1  The  Reformation,  in  its  earliest  days,  pledged  Christianity 
to  this  study.  Luther's  wrath  against  metaphysics.  Calvin's 
purpose  to  correct  theology  by  sound  Bible-study  ("Jean  Cal- 
vin au  Lecteur,"  preface  to  Institution  de  la  Rdigion  Chresti- 
enne,  1560).  But  the  pledge  did  uot  begin  to  be  kept  until  the 
eighteenth  century. 


CHAPTER   XI 


THE   INSPIRATION    OF    CRITICISM 


Periods  in 
history  of 
interpre- 
tation. 


200  A.D.- 
Reforma- 
tion. 


The  history  of  the  interpretation  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament has  two  periods.  The  first  is  the  credal  or 
dogmatic  period,  stretching  from  the  year  200^  — 
when,  speaking  roughly,  the  Christian  Bible  was 
formed  by  binding  the  New  Testament  books  into  one 
body  with  the  Old  Testament  —  to  the  Reformation. 
In  the  early  part  of  this  period,  a  splendid  system  of 
theology  was  shaped,  the  doctrine  of  Tradition  took 
form,  and  the  Creeds  became  the  mental  constitution 
of  the  Church.  In  the  later  part.  Tradition  found  a 
free  field  for  its  development.  The  conception  of  infal- 
libility, the  stress  of  the  times,  the  triumph  of  the 
Papacy,  conspired  to  drive  a  certain  view  of  inspira- 
tion, a  certain  set  of  opinions  about  the  Sacred  Books, 
deep  into  the  Christian  consciousness  —  apparently, 
almost  as  deep  as  life.  Meanwhile,  Biblical  study 
had  created  a  vast  literature.  Indeed,  to  comment  on 
Holy  Scripture  was  the  most  serious  occupation  of 
high-minded  men.  But  the  study  was  altogether  dog- 
matic and  devotional.    The  established  opinions  about 

1  Fairbairn,  The  Place  of  Christ  in  Modern  Theology ; 
Cheyne,  The  Hallowing  of  Criticism;  Seebohm,  Colet  (in 
Oxford  Reformers,  :3d  ed.);  Fichte,  Ideal  of  a  Scholar;  Salmon, 
Infallibility ;  Rcuss,  Hist,  of  the  Canon  of  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
2d  ed.,  tr.  1891  (especially  the  last  chapter,  entitled  "  Criticism 
and  the  Church  "). 

2  Harnack,  Das  K  T.  urn  d.  J.  200,  1889. 

180 


THE  INSPIRATION  OF  CfilTICISM  181 

the  Bible  were  accepted  as  final.  It  entered  iw  man's 
thought  to  suggest  that  the  facts  of  Scripture  were  at 
odds  with  Tradition.  No  one  dreamed  that  it  was 
necessary  to  go  behind  Tradition,  in  order  to  find  the 
Word  of  God. 

The  second  period  reaches  from  the  Reformation  to  Reformation 
our  own  day.  The  Protestants  of  the  sixteenth  and  '^^^'^  ^^^'" 
seventeenth  centuries  were,  for  tlie  most  part,  no  less 
dogmatic  than  the  mediae val  scholars.  But  by  setting 
the  idea  of  an  infallible  Bible  at  swords'  points  with 
the  idea  of  an  infallible  Church,  they  effectually  shat- 
tered the  unity  and  authority  of  Tradition.  The  Bible 
came  into  direct  contact  with  consciousness.  The 
critical  principle  was  established.  It  was  only  a 
question  of  time  when  the  Scriptures  must  speak  for 
themselves.  And  time  did  not  tarry.  The  eighteenth 
century,  the  hinge  in  the  history  of  interpretation, 
threw  theology  and  Tradition  into  bankruptcy.  A 
new  kind  of  authority  appeared,  the  authority  of  facts, 
—  the  facts  of  Nature  and  the  facts  of  history.  To 
see  things  as  they  are  in  themselves,  without  regard 
to  inherited  opinions  about  things,  became  a  supreme 
mental  obligation.  The  entire  mental  process,  no 
matter  what  the  object  on  which  the  mind  acted, 
became  critical. 

The  Bible,  having  broken  away  from  the  protection   First-hand 

and  imprisonment  of  Tradition,  must  needs  submit  study  ami 

'■  knowledge, 

itself    to    fearless,    first-hand   study.      The    Church 

authority  which,  in  the  thirteenth  century,  had  said 

to  reason,  "  Thus  far  but  no  farther !  "  no  longer  stood 

on  guard.     The  Bible,  speaking  for  itself,  must  speak 

to  reason.     Bible-study  becomes  direct.     Criticism  is 

the  order  of  tlie  day.     It  enters,  as  a  new  ideal,  into 

the  life  of  the  Church. 

Those  words  are  not  strained.    By  an  ideal  we  mean  Criticism  a 

a  vision  of  life  that  sets  us  upon  a  journey,  through  "^"^  ideal. 


182      TIISTOliT  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

duty,  into  a  promised  land  of  peace  and  power.  And, 
in  all  soberness,  unless  the  direct  or  critical  study  of 
the  Scriptures  is  in  our  age  a  duty,  then  we  may  safely 
say  that  history,  having  lost  the  power  to  speak  and 
teach,  is  dumb  upon  all  the  questions  that  touch  us  to 
the  quick.  Criticism  is  a  necessity  imposed  upon  the 
mind  of  the  Church  —  upon  the  Christian  conscious- 
ness, if  we  prefer  the  phrase  —  by  the  very  constitu- 
tion of  the  Church  cooperating  with  the  methods  and 
apparatus  of  our  time.  Dogmatic  speculation  was  the 
prime  duty  of  the  Church  in  the  Nicene  age.  In  no 
other  way  could  the  Christian  reason  have  real  con- 
versation and  commerce  with  the  organised  know- 
ledge of  the  Mediterranean  world;  for  that  was 
philosophical  and  speculative.^  But  the  organised 
knowledge  of  our  age  is  scientific;  its  method  is  criti- 
cal; its  objects,  the  original  facts  of  Nature  and  His- 
tory; the  consequence,  an  unsparing  examination  of 
all  hypotheses,  whether  they  date  from  day  before 
yesterday  or  the  most  venerable  antiquity.  The 
Church,  then,  if  she  would  have  commerce  with  our 
time,  even  as  the  ancient  Church  had  commerce  with 
the  ancient  time,  must  take  criticism  with  profound 
seriousness.  Coquetry  will  not  do.  Even  a  left- 
handed  marriage  between  authority  and  interpretation 
will  not  serve.  Criticism  is  her  prime  duty.  Through 
the  duty  lies  the  road  to  peace  and  power. 

The  sins  of  critics  no  more  impair  the  authority  of 
criticism  than  the  sins  of  Churchmen  impair  the  right 
of  the  Church  to  exist.  It  were  easy,  if  it  were  worth 
our  while,  to  draw  up  a  catalogue  of  sins.  Critics 
have  set  up  cliques  for  purposes  of  mutual  admiration. 

1  Make  all  allowance  for  the  splendid  scientific  work  of  Alex- 
andria, yet  this  remains  true.  The  mood  of  the  great  body  of 
earnest  men  was  not  scientific  but  philosophical.  Wiudelband, 
Mist,  of  Philosophy,  pt.  2,  ch.  2.     , 


THE  INSriRATTON  OF  CltlTICISM  183 

They  have  known  too  much.  They  have  gone  a-wlior- 
ing  after  new  things.  They  have  invented  a  modern 
heresy  —  the  heresy  of  contemporaneity.  But  enough 
of  that,  and  more  than  enough.  To  what  purpose  is 
it  to  dwell  upon  the  sins  of  individual  critics,  when 
it  has  been  proved  that  criticism  is  a  saving  necessity 
laid  upon  us  by  tlie  Lord  of  the  Church?  With  or 
without  our  will,  we  must  follow  him. 

The  honour  of  Christ  is  at  stake. ^    The  act  whereby   Honour  of 
the  Reformation  exalted  the  Bible  above  Tradition  ^^"^t. 
was  one  with  the  act  whereby  the  Christian  conscious- 
ness declared  that  there  should  be  no  vicar  of  Christ 
save  Christ  himself.      The  doctrine  of  justification 
through  faith  was  proclaimed  with  one  breath,  and  in 
the  next  the  sovereignty  and  clearness  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture.''   That   the   soul   should   cast   itself  upon   the 
Saviour's  care,  and  that  the  Saviour's  book  should  Evangelical 
be  brought  close  to  the  common  life,  and  opened  to  critfcisim" 
the  reading  and  the  study  of  the  laity,  were  things 
that  went  together.      The  direct  knowledge  of  his 
person  could  not  be  separated  from  the  free  and  first- 
hand study  of  his  book.    His  right  to  be  his  own  vicar 
drew  after  it  the  right  of  the  Bible  to  be  its  own  inter- 
preter.*   He  who  is  for  us  the  embodied  Word  of  God 

1  As  early  as  Wiclif  the  knowledge  of  Scripture  was  conse- 
crated to  the  honour  of  Christ. 

Lechler,  Wiclif,  I,  pp.  409^73;  II,  pp.  265-267.  Bengel 
repeatedly  associated  his  Bible-work  with  the  Saviour's  honour. 
It  is  also  to  be  observed  that  the  eighteenth  century,  which  laid 
the  foundations  of  criticism,  at  the  same  time  brought  the 
humanity  of  our  Lord  into  prominence.  Domer,  Person 
Christi.  (1853),  IT,  pp.  907-015. 

2  Kaftan,  Truth  of  the  Christian  Religion,  Div.  1,  ch.  3  ; 
Lipsius,  Dogmatik  (1893),  pp.  139,  141-143,  149,  151,  155,  156. 

'  The  Protestant  doctrine  regarding  the  "  clearness"  of  Scrip- 
ture did  not  mean  that  the  Scripture  could  be  nuistered  without 
study.     What  was  really  at  stake  was  the  right  to  study.    Were 


184      n  IS  TORY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 


"Critical" 
and  "  devo- 
tional." 


Devotional 
element  in 
criticism. 


cannot  be  understood,  according  to  his  own  mind, 
apart  from  a  Bible-study  that  draws  its  inspiration 
and  its  strength  from  devotion  to  him,  while  it  takes 
its  methods  from  the  historical  spirit  of  our  age. 

Our  study  of  the  New  Testament,  therefore,  ceasing 
to  be  dogmatic,  has  become  historical  and  critical. 
But  it  need  not,  for  that  reason,  cease  to  be  devo- 
tional. "  Critical "  and  "  devotional "  are  adjectives 
which  may  live  together  quite  as  happily  as  "dog- 
matic "and  "devotional."^  The  Word  of  God  need 
not  be  less  helpful,  less  rich  in  spiritual  suggestion, 
because  we  know  it  in  its  history.  We  may  gain  a 
critical  knowledge  of  nature  without  losing  our  sense 
of  nature's  beauty.  The  knowledge  that  the  ground 
lines  of  the  landscape  are  the  result  of  a  certain  order 
of  rock  formation  need  not  permanently  impair  the 
landscape's  power  to  set  us  free  from  the  cares  that 
harass  the  unity  of  life.  For  a  while  that  may  be  the 
case.  But  in  the  end  the  beauty  will  be  more  pervad- 
ing and  compelling  because  through  it  the  earth  tells 
the  story  of  her  struggles.  Even  so,  the  beauty  of 
God's  Word  may  be  impaired  for  a  time  by  our  ana- 
lytical study  of  the  sources.  But  in  the  end  its  power 
to  cheer  our  hearts  and  strengthen  our  purpose  shall 
be  the  greater,  by  reason  of  our  deeper  knowledge  of 
the  history  through  wliich  the  being  and  beauty  of 
God  have  been  revealed. 

The  very  word  "criticism,"  objectionable  as  it 
sounds  to  many,  contains,  when  rightly  taken,  a 
deeply  devotional  element.     For,  to  the  student,  it  is 


the  laity  to  have  the  right  of  free  Bible-study  and  free  speech  ? 
Or  was  the  Bible  to  be  kept  within  the  Tradition  of  the  Church, 
—  Tradition  being  a  clerical  monopoly  ? 

1  Leonardo  da  Vinci  was  not  the  less  an  artist  by  reason  of 
his  knowledge  of  anatomy.  The  antithesis  between  the  critical 
and  the  devotional  moods  is  not  inherent. 


THE  IN SPI RATION  OF  CRITICISM  185 

a  steady  reminder  that  he  must  be  on  guard  against 
reading  his  own  thoughts  into  God's  Word.  The 
Bible-student  of  the  old  days,  in  good  faith,  carried 
into  the  Scriptures  every  conception  that  was  dear  to 
him,  no  matter  where  it  came  from.  Thus  Philo 
dressed  Moses  in  the  clothes  of  Plato  and  Aristotle. 
Thus  the  Popes  transformed  Peter  the  fisherman  into 
the  prince  of  the  earth.  In  many  ways  the  sacred 
text  lay  at  the  mercy  of  the  devout  interpreter.  But 
the  critical  conception  of  the  Scriptures  makes  the 
student  reverent  of  the  rights  of  the  text.  He  is  gov- 
erned by  the  desire  to  know  the  original  feeling  and 
thought  of  the  men  of  the  Bible.  He  has  a  resolute 
purpose  to  permit  no  need  of  his  own  soul,  no  neces- 
sity of  the  Church,  to  force  him  one  inch  beyond  the 
opinion  which  the  text  itself  has  given  him.  Surely, 
this  is  to  give  the  highest  possible  honour  to  the 
Scriptures.  Surely,  if  it  can  be  said  of  an}^  kind  of 
consecrated  work  that  to  labour  is  to  pray,  then  it 
may  be  said  of  patient,  reverent,  and  fearless  criticism. 

Criticism  has  its  inspiration.  The  credal  period  The  inspira- 
was  inspired.  Without  it  we  should  not  have  had  our  clsm!'  ^^'*'" 
Bible.  Without  it  we  should  not  have  had  that  com- 
mon Christian  consciousness  which  is  the  foundation 
of  the  idealising  forces  of  our  time.  Our  own  critical 
age  is  no  less  inspired.  For,  Avithout  the  historical 
interpretation,  the  Bil)le  would  cease  to  be  our  book 
of  witness  to  the  creative  and  saving  unity  of  the 
divine  life.  We  cannot  go  backward.  The  road  into 
the  Middle  Ages  is  no  thoroughfare  of  the  Christian 
reason.  At  best,  it  is  a  by-path.  In  the  stress  and 
strain  of  the  coming  days,  many,  no  doubt,  will  walk 
therein.  Xone  the  less,  it  is  a  by-path.  We  know, 
unless  History  has  wholly  deceived  us,  we  know  that 
God's  highway  runs  through  a  deeper,  a  more  truly 
critical  study  of  his  Word. 


186      UISTOIiY  OF  THE  HIGHER   CRITICISM 

England  and  It  may  be  that  England  and  America,  now  that  Ger- 
Amenca.  many  has  marked  out  the  road,  have  a  work  to  do  that 
Germany  has  not  been  able  to  do.  The  isolation  of 
the  academic  life,  necessary  as  it  has  been  to  the  free- 
dom of  research,  may  have  entailed  a  sort  of  blindness 
to  some  important  aspects  of  the  Scriptures.  Pos- 
sibly, the  English  and  American  scholars  may  see, 
through  the  grace  of  circumstance,  what  the  German 
scholar  has  not  seen.^ 
Criticism  It  may  be  that  the  social  movement  of  our  age, 

and  the  while  it  brings  in  its  train  some  grave  dangers  to 

social  move-  ,      n     ^     tt    ,     ■ 

ment.  sound  thought,^  shall  bring  a  great  blessing.     The 

central  idea  of  the  Scriptures  is  the  Kingdom  of  God. 

The  dogmatic  movement  of  the  ancient  and  mediseval 

Church,  going  along  with  a  deepening  affection  for 

the  monastic  ideal,  sorely  obscured  that  idea.     But  in 

our  time  it  has  shone  forth  afresh.^    And  it  is  pos- 

1  The  Bible  as  a  grand  total  may  be  waiting  for  a  class  of 
scholars  who  shall  stand  closer  to  the  collective  religious  life 
both  in  its  practical  needs  and  in  its  social  action.  In  England 
and  America  the  pulpit  and  the  chair  are  very  close  together, 
the  result  being  that  critical  courage  and  thoroughness  are 
harder  to  get.  The  scholar  is  apt  to  pay  a  heavy  price  for  his 
freedom.  Along  with  this  goes  the  fact  that  the  necessity  of 
popularising  the  results  of  criticism  is  more  pressing.  At  the 
same  time,  the  situation  is  more  nervous.  The  gain,  however, 
is  that  the  scholar  has  the  chance  to  get  an  instinctive  sense  of 
the  nature  of  religion  on  its  collective  and  social  side.  This  may 
fit  him  to  appreciate  certain  undiscovered  aspects  of  those  Sacred 
Books,  which  are  the  products  and  records,  not  of  a  school,  but 
of  a  religious  community. 

2  Sociology  is  a  great  help  to  sound  theology,  but  a  poor,  if 
not  perilous,  substitute  for  it.  Did  we  not  know  that  the  pres- 
ent is  the  preparation  for  a  better  future,  we  should  look  upon 
the  low  ebb  of  speculative  interest  in  the  Churches  as  a  bad 
sign.  In  many  a  case  already  the  critical  passion,  lacking  specu- 
lation, has  slipped  into  naturalism. 

3  Lipsius,  Dogmatik,  pp.  822,  840 ;  Nitzsch,  Dogmatik,  p.  26. 


TUB  INSPIRATION  OF  CRITICISM  187 

sible  that  the  social  movement  may  bring  us  into  a 
common  mood  with  the  Bible,  so  that  we  shall  be  able 
to  stmly  it  with  instinctive  sympathy.^ 

However  that  may  be,  we  know  our  duty.  The 
Word  of  God  has  been  unbound,  set  free  from  the 
shackles  that  human  opinion  had  put  upon  it.  The 
scholar  Avill  strengthen  himself  with  the  prayer  that, 
through  his  work,  the  Word  of  the  Lord  may  have 
free  course  and  be  glorified  (2  Thess.  3:1);  so  that  the 
Bible  may  commend  itself  to  reasoning  and  reverent 
men  as  God's  book  of  final  values  for  all  who  would 
live  nobly. 

1  Cheyne,  Jeremiah,  His  Life  and  Times,  p.  12. 


INDEX 


Allegory:  opposed  to  historical 
nature  of  revelation,  30;  uni- 
versal tendency  in  ancient 
days   'M;  overcome,  177,  178. 

"Apostolic  Age":  significance 
of  the  title,  179. 

Auiiustine:  opinions  concerning 
relation  of  the  Church  to  the 
Bible, ;«,  u.  1. 

Authority:  an  authoritative  in- 
tc'rpretatif)n  necessary  in  an- 
tiquity, ;5i2;  its  quality  not  in 
keeping  with  Scrii)ture,  45-4!) ; 
involves  the  Church  iu  self- 
contradiction,  50-52. 

Bauer,  B.,  170,  n.  1. 

Baur,  F.  C,  127;  ushers  in  the 
new  principle  in  criticism,  128 ; 
idea  of  conflict  iu  primitive 
Christianity,  12iM:50. 

Bede,  43,  n.  2. 

Bengel,  '.tl-iy. 

Bible :  not  passive  in  the  critical 
process,  17-1!);  its  own  charac- 
ter a  main  cause,  20-2();  the 
Church's  standard,  27;  not  a 
sacerdotal  book,  28-2!);  iso- 
lated, ■iS—il ;  first-hand  knowl- 
edge of  Scriptures  not  possible 
in  Middle  Ages,  44;  growing 
reverence  for  Scripture,  iJO,  ;j3  ; 
conflict  with  Tradition,  51,  54; 
its  own  interpreter,  75-7()  ; 
thrown  open  to  observation, 
8!);  isolation  overcome,  lOii  ; 
supremacy  uf   Scriptures    de- 


mands historical  interpreta- 
tion, 105. 

Bible-study :  since  second  cen- 
tury, !i ;  part  of  higher  culture, 
3-4. 

Bleek,  166-1G7. 

Boniface  VIII  states  the  claims 
of  the  Pai)acy,  55. 

Bradford,  75. 

Bretschueider,  105,  u.  2,  114. 

Canon :  relation  to  Bible-study, 
10,  n.  1 ;  above  investigation, 
42;  becomes  the  subject  of 
historical  study,  103-104. 

Cassiodorus,  41,  n.  1. 

Change,  idea  of:  had  no  place  in 
ancient  view  of  Scriptures,  42, 
100. 

Chillingworth,63. 

Christ,  person  of:  the  Saviour 
and  his  book,  25;  historical 
study  of  our  time  contrasted 
with  speculation  of  Nicene  Age, 
144-145  ;  honour  of  Christ  and 
criticism,  1.50-151,  17!),  183. 

Church,  relation  to  Scripture, 
17-1!),  27,  32-»4,  53. 

Colet  defends  literal  interpreta- 
tion, G3. 

Comte,  14(). 

Conservatism  :  that  of  Germany 
contrasted  with  conservatism 
in  England  and  America,  159- 
Kil. 

Credner,  114. 

Criticism  :  waste  attending  it,  8; 


189 


190 


INDEX 


view  taken  of  historj^  10-11 ; 
another  name  for  Bible-study, 
13  ;  definition,  14-15,  29,  81,  84 ; 
relation  to  interpretation,  16, 
n.  1,  105 ;  two  elements  in 
obligation  of  criticism,  61-68; 
relation  to  Protestantism,  94; 
criticism  of  history  and  criti- 
cism of  "sources,"  126, 149-152; 
criticism  and  the  social  move- 
ment, 186. 

Deists :  their  attack  on  Protestant 
doctrine  of  inspiration,  tK). 

De  Wette,  110-111. 

Differences  of  opinion  in  N.  T. 
not  seen  by  ancient  church,  23- 
24;  brought  out  in  eighteenth 
century,  103. 

Dogma,  decline  of,  2,  85. 

Du  Perron,  80. 

Education :  history  of,  in  rela- 
tion to  the  history  of  criticism, 
70,  97. 

Eighteenth  century:  contrasted 
with  Middle  Ages,  77-79 ;  criti- 
cism born,  80;  precipitation- 
point  in  history  of  Occident,  87 ; 
central  point  in  history  of  criti- 
cism, 88,  108-109. 

England :  not  a  leader  in  higher 
criticism,  95-96. 

Erasmus,  72. 

Erigeua,  50. 

Evolution:  idea  of,  1,  174;  medi- 
ates between  idea  of  histoi-y 
and  idea  of  revelation,  175- 
176. 

Ewald,  162. 

Feuerbach,  170. 

*'  Fragmentists,"  158. 

Genuineness,  question  of,  takes 
the  place  of  the  question  of 
inspiration,  92,  n.  2. 


Germany,  part  played  by,  in  his- 
tory of  criticism,  94-97,  137- 
138. 

Gieseler,  114. 

Greek :  knowledge  of,  in  Middle 
Ages,  43;  in  sixteenth  century, 
72. 

Guericke,  161. 

Harnack,  169-170. 

Hebrew :  ignorance  of,  in  Middle 
Ages,  43 ;  comes  again  into  use, 
72,  75. 

Hegel,  relation  to  critical  move- 
ment, 119-121. 

Herder  humanises  the  Scriptures, 
108. 

"Higher  Criticism":  insignifi- 
cance of  term  "higher,"  12- 
13. 

Hilgenfeld,  157. 

Historical  scepticism,  79. 

Historical  spirit :  new  kind  of 
piety,  5,  n.  1 ;  significance  for 
Bible-study,  171  ff. 

Hoffmann,  161-162. 

Holzmann,  98,  157. 

Hooker,  71. 

"  Humanities  "  :  their  direct  con- 
tact with  Scripture  the  begin- 
ning of  criticism,  102. 

Humanity,  idea  of,  in  old  theol- 
ogy, 115-116;  in  eighteenth 
century,  116-117 ;  bearing  on 
criticism,  118-119. 

Humanity  of  Christ:  relation  to 
the  human  authors  of  Scrip- 
ture, 24-25. 

Ideal :  its  relation  to  the  histori- 
cal, 87,  164,  174-175. 

Illusion  of  a  purely  critical  pro- 
cess, 138-139. 

Infallibility  :  infallibility  of 
Scriptures  necessitates  infalli- 
l)ility  of  the  Church,  35 ;  results 
in  interpretation,  29;    infalli- 


lyDEX 


191 


bility  of  Church  as  insurance 
against  exegetical  chaos,  30; 
centralised  by  Rome,  35 ;  disso- 
lution in  eighteenth  century, 
87;  opposed  both  to  revelation 
and  to  reason,  173. 

Inspiration:  ancient  idea  drove 
the  human  authors  out  of  Scrii>- 
ture,  li'.>,  ;^;  gave  unity  to 
older  Hible-study,  111-112; 
periods  in  history,  91,  n.  1; 
decay  of  ancient  conception 
permits  human  authors  of 
Scripture  to  tie  seen,  103. 

Inspiration  of  criticism,  LSO  ff. 

luterpretation :  historical  inter- 
pretation demanded  by  Refor- 
mation, 101 ;  made  possible  by 
eighteenth  century,  lOo ;  peri- 
ods in  history,  180-181. 

"  Introduction,"  177-178. 

Irenajus,  his  conception  of  the 
Gospels  contrasted  with  the 
modern,  106,  u.  1. 

Jerome.  30-40. 

"  Jewish  Christianity  "  in  N.  T. : 
discovered,  9'>,  n.  1,  103;  ex- 
ploited by  Baur,  129-130. 

Laity,  the:  they  put  an  end  to 
the  clerical  monopoly  of  inter- 
pretation, 54;  help  on  the 
breach  between  Biljle  and  Tra- 
dition, 52-50;  rights  of ,  G()-C7; 
lay  movement  in  theology,  81- 
84. 

Lechler,  167. 

Luther,  CA,  03,  n.  2. 

Mental  competition,  part  played 
by  it  in  history  of  criticism, 
36-38,86. 

Michaelis,  105-106. 

Middle  Ages,  conditions  favour- 
ing the  authority  of  Tradition, 
36-38. 


Motives  of  Bible-study,  the 
scientific,  3;  the  religious,  4; 
conflict,  6;  union,  7. 

Neander,  1(>5. 

Nicene  Age,  primary  work  not 

Biblical  .scholarship,  100. 
Niebuhr,  70,  H8. 
"N.  T.  Theology,"  178. 

Papacy:  centralises  Tradition, 
3t;,  45, 53 ;  holds  powers  of  keys 
to  interpretation  of  Scripture, 
55-50. 

Paul  us,  140. 

Ptleiderer,  157. 

Philo,  31. 

Plato,  estimate  of  teaching  iK)wer 
of  books,  26. 

Problems :  ancient  idea  of  in- 
spiration made  them  impossi- 
ble, 10();  appear  in  eighteenth 
century,  106-108. 

Reading  of  Scriptures:  in  four- 
teenth century,  74 ;  in  sixteenth 
century,  75. 

Reason :  concordat  with  author- 
ity, 69;  independence,  78. 

Reformation :  an  act  of  con- 
science,  62 ;  discounts  tradition , 
62;  entails  direct  Bible-study 
and  historical  interpretation, 
64-65;  inconsistent,  72-7:!. 

Renaissance:  exalted  lay  learn- 
ing, 70;  demanded  original 
texts,  71-72. 

Reuchlin,  72. 

Reuss,  163. 

Ritschl,  school  of,  167-169. 

Schleiermacher,  114-115, 163-164; 

school  of,  165-167. 
"  Schools,"  153-154. 
Semler:    his    life    typical,   101; 

work,  102-105 ;  contrasted  with 

Baur,  131. 


192 


INDEX 


Simon,  91,  99-100. 

"  Sources,"  141. 

Specialism,  evils  of,  16,  n.  1. 

State,  the:  helps  to  shatter  tradi- 
tion, 54,  n.  1;  its  rise  brings 
with  it  lay  authority  and  privi- 
lege, 60. 

Strauss,  122-124;  forces  life  of 
Christ  to  the  front,  125 ;  dealing 
with  supernatural,  149-150. 

Strauss  and  Baur :  result  of  their 
work,  1.38,  140. 

Tendencies  in  criticism,  133, 146- 
150. 

"  Tendency,"  Baur's  theory  of, 
142-144,  155-156. 

Text:  demand  for  original  texts, 
71-72 ;  doctrinal  consequences 
of  "  variants,"  90-91 ;  criticism 
of  text  precedes  "  Higher  Criti- 
cism," 89-90. 

Theology,  in  modern  university, 
98. 


Thiersch,  161. 

Toland,  95,  n.  1. 

Tradition :  fixed  interpretation, 
in  relation  to  the  canon,  31; 
necessary  to  ancient  church, 
30,  32 ;  conditions  favouring, 
36-38 ;  makes  direct  approach 
to  Word  of  God  impossible,  56; 
breach  between  Tradition  and 
Scriptures,  57. 

Translation  of  Scriptures,  66 

Tiibingen  school,  154-158 

Ullmann,  126. 

University,  part  of,  in  history  of 
criticism,  97-98. 

Vatke,  121. 

Vulgate,  supremacy  of,  43. 

Weiss,  167. 
Weisse,  126. 
WeizsJicker,  157. 
Wetstein,  92,  n.  2. 


New  Testament  Handbooks 

EDITED    BY 

SHAILER    MATHEWS 

Professor  of  New  Testament  History  and  Interpretation 
IN  the  University  of  Chicago 

Cloth  16iao  75  cents  net  each 


The  History  of  Textual  Criticism  of  the  New  Testament 

By  Professor  Marvin  R.  Vincent,  Professor  of  New  Testament 
Exegesis,  Union  Theological  Seminary. 

The  History  of  the  Higher  Criticism  of  the  New  Testament 

By  Professor  Henry  S.  Nash,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Inter- 
pretation, Cambridge  Divinity  School. 

Introduction  to  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament 

By  Professor  B.  Wisner  Bacon,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Inter- 
pretation, Yale  University. 

The  History  of  New  Testament  Times  in  Palestine 

By  Professor  Shailer  Mathews,  Professor  of  New  Testament  His- 
tory and  Interpretation,  University  of  Chicago. 

The  Teaching  of  Jesus 

By  Professor  George  B.  Stevens,  Professor  of  Systematic  Theology, 
Yale  University. 

The  Biblical  Theology  of  the  New  Testament 

By  Professor  E.  P.  Gould,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpreta- 
tion, Protestant  Episcopal  Divinity  School,  Philadelphia. 


THE   MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

64-66  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


Ethics   and   Revelation 


BY 


HENRY  S.   NASH 


Professor  in  the  Episcopal  Theological  School  at  Cavibridge i 
Author  of"  Genesis  of  the  Social  Conscience" 


i2mo.    Cloth.    $1.50 


Nashville  Batiner : 

"  The  author  goes  into  the  work  with  an  earnestness, 
breadth,  and  inteUigence  that  gives  great  interest  to  what 
he  has  to  say." 

Charleston  News  and  Courier: 

"  The  value  and  significance  of  Professor  Nash's  lectures 
lie  chiefly  in  the  advanced  ground  which  he  takes  up  with 
regard  to  the  authority  of  the  Bible  and  the  Church  in  the 
matter  of  religious  and  social  ethics.  He  begins  by  the 
assertion  that  the  Bible  marks  out  the  road  along  which 
conscience  must  travel  if  it  would  treat  our  life  on  earth 
with  abiding  seriousness.  But  he  is  careful  to  show  that 
the  Bible  should  be  seen  and  regarded  in  the  light  of 
history." 

THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 

64-66  FIFTH   AVENUE,   NEW  YORK 


Genesis  of  the  Social  Conscience. 

BY 

HENRY   SYLVESTER  NASH, 

Professor  in  the  Episcopal  Theological  School, 
Cambridge,  Mass. 

THE   RELATION   BETWEEN  THE   ESTABLISHMENT  OF  CHRISTIAN- 
ITY   IN    EUROPE  AND  THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION. 

Crown  8vo.    Cloth.    Price  $1.50. 


THE   OUTLOOK. 

«  To  the  world's  stock  of  good  books  Professor  Nash  has  added  one 
which  is  not  the  work  of  a  clever  summarizer  only,  but  that  of  a  clear 
and  forceful  originator.  Perhaps  not  since  the  publication  of  Mr.  Kidd's 
volume  has  a  more  genuinely  popular  sociological  work  appeared.  .  .  . 

The  results  of  Professor  Nash's  ripe  thought  are  presented  in  a 
luminous,  compact,  and  often  epigrammatic  style.  The  treatment  is  at 
once  masterful  and  helpful,  and  the  book  ought  to  be  a  quickening 
influence  of  the  highest  kind;  it  surely  will  establish  the  fame  of  its 
author  as  a  profound  thinker,  one  from  whom  we  have  a  right  to  expect 
future  inspiration  of  a  kindred  sort.  .  .  . 

Through  a  multitude  of  original  and  brilliant  metaphors,  similes, 
and  illustrations,  succeeding  one  another  sometimes  in  almost  bewilder- 
ing number.  Professor  Nash  leads  us  step  by  step  in  the  retrospect  of 
the  history  of  man's  individualization.  .  .  ." 

NEW  UNITY. 

"The  book  is  a  novelty.  It  is  an  interesting  experiment.  It  is  worth 
writing  and  therefore  worth  the  reading.  Professor  Nash  undertakes 
to  demonstrate  the  moral  thread  in  history.  He  follows  this  moral  line 
alone.  It  is  in  order  to  show  the  rise  and  growth  of  the  social  con- 
science. .  .  .     The  style  of  the  book  is  crisp;   but  it  is  never  dull." 

E.  P.  P. 

THE   CRITIC. 

"The  pages  glitter  with  bright  sayings;  there  are  many  attractive 
passages.  The  book  is  more  than  a  tacit  protest  against  the  material- 
istic explanation  of  history." 


THE    MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

64-66  FIFTH  AVENUE.   NEW  YORK 


TAe  Work  of  breaching 

A  BOOK  FOR  THE  CLASSROOM  AND  STUDY 

By  ARTHUR  L.  HOYT,  D.D. 

Professor  of  H^miletics  and  Sociology  i.m  the  Auburn  Theological  Seminaky 

Cloth  12mo  $1.50  net 

"  It  furnishes  hints,  counsels,  helps,  directions,  and  conclusions  based  on 
the  questions  of  students,  the  experience  of  the  author,  on  the  sage  advice 
of  other  teachers,  and  on  independent  study,  .  .  .  applicable  to  the  needs 
of  the  hour."  —  Western   Ckrisi/an  Advocate, 


^presentattT^e  cModern  Preachers 

By  LEWIS  O.  BRASTOW,  D.D. 

Professor  of  Practical  Theology,  Yale  University 

Cloth  12mo  $1.50  net 

Careful  critical  estimates  of  preachers  who  have  prominently  repre- 
sented difTerent  schools  of  preaching  during  the  last  century;  whose  skill 
and  force  in  presenting  the  truth  have  won  the  right  to  a  special  hearing. 


THE   MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

64-66  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


I  n    URfl. 


1        VnM?     X 


5 

RECT5  LD- 

NOV  r 

SEP  24 

N  29 1986 


Os 


,  o  fob 


-,.*r^.--  ^  o 


JRt 


1984 


Form  L9-32ot-8,'57(.C8680s4)444 


up  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARV  FACILITY 
"■"■  |llll||ll|||l|lllllllll||lll|{!{| 


llli 


AA    000  618  587 


iilinillnilH 


iiiiiii 
III 

■ill  111 


ill 


iiiii' 


Ntilt'.IIMk 


